KSP Loading... A closer look into Update 1.6

[Dfthu]

I don't I have ever been more excited for a update! This all great stuff!

[Xurkitree]

You had to touch the advanced nose cones goddamit 

LEAVE THEM ALONE

This reveal is actually worse than some of the other ones - You show the Lander Can IVA, but nothing about the downward visibility, abruptly change the Terrier, ruin the Advanced nose cones and not saying enough on bug fixes for stock and more for MH.

Rather disappointed after all the great stuff you've been showing.

As for modders get those nose cones back

[Foxster]

Regarding the Terrier variants (and the other engines with size variants)...

I've never been sure whether choosing a variant of an engine means that it's mesh size for drag purposes changes too.  For example, the revamped Terrier looks like it has a size 0 variant, does that mean it and attached size 0 tanks will be matched for drag?

Update:  Just did a bit of testing with an existing engine with variants...

I checked the drag reading for the engine at 6km launched full power straight up. Here are the numbers:

Large variant: 291

Medium variant (visibly matched): 234

Small variant: 6.84 (!)

So the apparently unmatched smallest variant has a tiny fraction of the drag of the other variants. Which makes no sense as surely the variant that matches the size of the tank it is attached to should have the lowest drag. No?

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Foxster

[RoverDude]

@Foxster - Each variant has its own drag cube.

[Aquaticfantastic]

14 hours ago, SQUAD said:

we are working on a console-optimized update

Delta-v please! I keep running out of beermats!

But in all seriousness this is very good news, I look forward the having access to at least some revamped parts and variants, thanks @SQUAD 

[Kroslev Kerman]

Awesome! i would use the Bare Terrier Engine(And clip it in so only the Nozzle only shows) for my Ascent stages for my Landers and the full version for my descent stages

[VoidCosmos]

When is the update coming out

[swjr-swis]

3 hours ago, Foxster said:

So the apparently unmatched smallest variant has a tiny fraction of the drag of the other variants. Which makes no sense as surely the variant that matches the size of the tank it is attached to should have the lowest drag. No?

You need to check the drag of the tank in front of the engine. Those numbers don't surprise me, the small variant should have the smallest amount of drag, but the unmatched bottom node of the tank should -if acting consistently- show more drag with the smallest unmatched variant than with the medium matched one.

[roboslacker]

This is perfect.

[GearsNSuch]

I... I...

 

(Incoherent noises)

 

That's beautiful.

 

First of all, the adapters and nosecones are perfect-- not too much detail, not too little. They don't look like blobs of putty anymore, but neither do they look like a set of plate armor. Not much else to say here; they really seem like something a kerbal would put on a rocket. Thank you!

 

Second, the IVA is wonderfully done, with all kinds of little details and, so it would seem, great visibility, but I would appreciate perhaps a little more detail, especially in the texturing department. It isn't high priority, but maybe some industrial... whatchamacallums... those... gritty... grippy... things... that... look like the Chevrolet logo repeated over and over again... on the floor. But that's such a minor, minor nitpick in the face of an amazing job.

 

Poodle's still great, but the Terrier! Somehow, you managed to retain the character and charm of a previously ugly model and turn it into something beautiful. The new terrier is, to summarize, an amazing piece of work, with three variants to boot... Wonderful. And also, clever use of emissives to make the engine body light up.

 

Well done, and thank you!

Edited December 14, 2018 by GearsNSuch
Phew! Talk about a delayed grammar check...

[Vexillar]

The Terrier is dead... Long Live the Terrier!!

The old one was one of my favourites, and I too will miss its shiny foil cone... but the new variants are a great.

The Lander IVA is plenty interesting, though I'm still wanting to see how the the downward view is from pilot's PoV...

[Xurkitree]

13 hours ago, GregroxMun said:

[snip]

This sums up my anger at the nosecones well. We want the old versions now.

[XLjedi]

I do like the look of the new nosecone skins. 

This is a pretty good example though of, "Why not just use your variant engine to add the new skins as optional variants so you don't upset people?"  I honestly can't figure out why you retire/change parts instead of just adding the variants and new parts? 

My only criticism is the orange variant on the Mk7 should have been entirely orange so I could (almost) make a space shuttle main fuel tank.  I'm still waiting for you to add the hemispherical end cap part for that tank too.  Maybe someday when you're done retiring and changing all the pieces I like, you could maybe add the few that are still missing.  (Mk3 airplane cockpit, steerable large landing gear, the pointy and round ends of the orange shuttle fuel tank)

[klgraham1013]

8 hours ago, TriggerAu said:

That cleanup was a great effort all round and helped to focus some important bugs to the top of the pile yeah. It was massively appreciated. Hopefully the reminder of the voting system helps more people to share what they care about to bring things to the top again.

As long as you guys understand that most companies aren't afforded such a great group of volunteers.  The KSP community is fantastic, but they shouldn't be used as a crutch.

If I come off a little jaded, well, I tried to do my part on Not A Bug #18017, and in the end I was told it was not a bug.  How anyone can look at my videos and, with a straight face, say it's not a bug still blows my mind.

Spoiler

 

 

[V7 Aerospace]

9 minutes ago, Xurkitree said:

This sums up my anger at the nosecones well. We want the old versions now.

Well, Mk.7 is a major improvement, the old blue nosed nose cone now fits the game's colour scheme, the advanced nose cones have just increased the contrast on the details, the NCS tip now has panels.

I agree that some of the decisions are strange, too much detail can be a bad thing, but overall? we now have a far more coherent art style, and the removal of some of the older, more muddy-looking textures. But there is room for improvement, and time before the update arrives for improvements to be made.

[StylusHead]

13 hours ago, passinglurker said:

@StylusHead I'm not mad I'm just disappointed. Please tell me you guys redid porkjet's nosecones on accident.(Oh who am I kidding I'm quite livid it's been said before with the adapters that the style is getting too loud and busy for inconsequential structural parts and now it looks like you guys are doubling down and trying to over write the parts that should have been used as your design references in this regard)

 

Sorry to disappoint you here @passinglurker we needed to create nosecones that matched previously revamped parts in 1.5 release like the FL Tanks keeping that same look & feel which was of course based on the porkjet style and if I'm not wrong those new options were quite well received, these new nosecones can now be combined with their respective variants plus UVs and meshes were optimized where needed and for the porkjet ones we didn't actually removed them just kept the paneling based on the parts that usually go attached to those nosecones but mostly kept their original spirit. Different from what others could think these are not thought as one only part but as part of a whole vessel.

[Ahres]

I know this will get lost in here on the fourth page of this thread but I’ll post it anyway because it needs to be said.

I think all the revamps are great, I’m very excited for every single one of them including the Poodle, the Terrier, and the nose cones. And I get the feeling that most of the KSP community feels the same way I do. But @SQUAD is only seeing the negative comments because it’s a law of nature for unhappy people to speak up and happy ones to not say anything. Just look at American policitics.

So here I am, deep in the thread where I likely won’t get noticed, but hoping that our beloved developers are aware that many (probably most) of us are very excited for all the revamp that’s been done. Thanks Squad. 

[StylusHead]

1 minute ago, Ahres said:

I know this will get lost in here on the fourth page of this thread but I’ll post it anyway because it needs to be said.

I think all the revamps are great, I’m very excited for every single one of them including the Poodle, the Terrier, and the nose cones. And I get the feeling that most of the KSP community feels the same way I do. But @SQUAD is only seeing the negative comments because it’s a law of nature for unhappy people to speak up and happy ones to not say anything. Just look at American policitics.

So here I am, deep in the thread where I likely won’t get noticed, but hoping that our beloved developers are aware that many (probably most) of us are very excited for all the revamp that’s been done. Thanks Squad. 

Well you got noticed! In fact mostly everyone does!
Thanks!

[RealKerbal3x]

10 minutes ago, StylusHead said:

Sorry to disappoint you here @passinglurker we needed to create nosecones that matched previously revamped parts in 1.5 release like the FL Tanks keeping that same look & feel which was of course based on the porkjet style and if I'm not wrong those new options were quite well received, these new nosecones can now be combined with their respective variants plus UVs and meshes were optimized where needed and for the porkjet ones we didn't actually removed them just kept the paneling based on the parts that usually go attached to those nosecones but mostly kept their original spirit. Different from what others could think these are not thought as one only part but as part of a whole vessel.

I think it's great that you're keeping the original spirit of the parts! (Well, except the Poodle, whose old model was horrible in my opinion).

Will any deprecated parts from previous releases be removed in 1.6? I was wondering.

Edited December 13, 2018 by RealKerbal3x

[Phreakish]

3 hours ago, Xurkitree said:

This sums up my anger at the nosecones well. We want the old versions now.

I don't. 

[RealKerbal3x]

5 minutes ago, Phreakish said:

I don't. 

Same here. The new versions of the advanced nosecones are literally the old ones with some more contrast between the panels. It still looks Porkjet-ish, if that's the look you really want.

Edited December 13, 2018 by RealKerbal3x

[Foxster]

7 hours ago, RoverDude said:

@Foxster - Each variant has its own drag cube.

I assumed so but how do we know what it is? How can we tell what tank size drag cube matches what engine variant drag cube? 

I'm sure you know this stuff and you will have development tools to show you it but it's not revealed to us mere mortals. 

[RoverDude]

1 minute ago, Foxster said:

I assumed so but how do we know what it is? How can we tell what tank size drag cube matches what engine variant drag cube? 

I'm sure you know this stuff and you will have development tools to show you it but it's not revealed to us mere mortals. 

Same way you do with any other part - By looking at the mesh in game. if it appears to be a match, it's a match   If you put a fat engine under a skinny tank, or a skinny engine under a fat tank, you'll have issues same as you would with any other mismatch.

 

[Zero266]

after this update (which looks amazing by the way) could you focus a few updates on bug fixes and optimization. ksp kinda really needs it.

[Foxster]

27 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

Same way you do with any other part - By looking at the mesh in game. if it appears to be a match, it's a match   If you put a fat engine under a skinny tank, or a skinny engine under a fat tank, you'll have issues same as you would with any other mismatch.

That might be true for the tanks attached to the engine variants but the drag of the engines themselves seems out of wack to me.

Have a look at these three craft with the small, medium and large engine variants at 6km...

The drag of the tanks looks OK. The medium engine variant matches the tank size and so the tank has the lowest drag of the three. 

However, the drag of the engines is 6.86 for small, 225 for medium and 622 for large. Surely, the lowest drag should be for the engine with the matched size? Otherwise we might as well always just use the small variant because the drag of the combined parts is going to be so much less. 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Foxster