Jump to content

KSP2 Hype Train Thread


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

What does that have to do with the argument we're having?

It's literally the perception of sub-millimeter. What you've just done is move the goalpost by saying "well you can't tell if something's moved under a millimeter," because the original goal was "you can't see sub-millimeter sized objects."

Edited by Missingno200
Added "sized."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Missingno200 said:

It's literally the perception of sub-millimeter. What you've just done is move the goalpost by saying "well you can't tell if something's moved under a millimeter," because the original goal was "you can't see sub-millimeter sized objects."

No, I haven't. The entire argument has been about sub-millimeter movement on parts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

That only applies to TRAVELING. Not to parts or anything else. Sub-millimeter part placement is overkill and totally not needed, considering the offset tool will not be able to do sub-millimeter in the first place. Let alone the human eye can't really register sub-millimeter without special equipment. 

This is placement and object size. This is also the first time movement is mentioned on the macro scale, and it's pretty vague. I'm extrapolating that part.

19 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

You do realize I said, "Without special equipment." Because it's true. A millimeter is about the thickness of your fingernail, give or take. Now imagine your fingernail cut into 10 pieces so they're sub-millimeter. That's how small a sub-millimeter is.

This is also object size.

19 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

That tiny amount of movement is not perceivable by most people without a microscope or at least magnification glasses. So putting sub-millimeter movement on parts is ridiculous and no human, imo, can do that in game, even if they use the offset tool and a DPI mouse set so low they're cursor takes years to move. 

This is the literal first time you even remotely mention movement in your entire argument that doesn't pertain to space precision.

 

Look, I agree with you, sub-mm precision for building crafts is pretty absurd, but you need to take a moment away from the computer to really rethink your argument here so that you don't trap yourself like that.

Edited by Missingno200
Fixed a typo and added an end statement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

I think the adapter above is 3.75m and the engine shown is 2.5m? It is a curious thing though given Nertea's engine logic breakdown. Any chance its a funky NERVA variant?

The adapter appears to be 5m to 3.75m, to me the engines look like either one 3.75m part or five 1.25m engines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Missingno200 said:

This is placement and object size. This is also the first time movement is mentioned on the macro scale.

This is also object size.

This is the literal first time you even remotely mention movement in your entire argument that doesn't pertain to space precision.

 

Look, I agree with you, sub-mm precision for building crafts is pretty absurd, but you need to take a moment away from the computer to really rethink your argument here so that you don't trap yourself like that.


The argument actually stems back to my original post:

4 hours ago, MechBFP said:

If I had to wager a guess that is likely on purpose. Might be how time-wrap works to allow the vessel to accelerate while warping without the vehicle getting shaken apart, etc. All the connections come a little loose on purpose  to prevent the physics from ripping it apart. 

So it did start with time-wrap/movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

This is placement and object size. This is also the first time movement is mentioned on the macro scale.

Placement, yes, as in movement. Nothing about object size. Was referring to movement using the offset tool. Literally mention the offset tool in the post you quoted. The context is there.

3 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

This is also object size.

Nope. Again, movement. The context is there. Do I really need to say movement in every post? I would think not since this post is an addon to the last one, which is talking about movement distance.

3 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

This is the literal first time you even remotely mention movement in your entire argument that doesn't pertain to space.

No, it isn't. Literally in the first post you quoted I mention the offset tool, AKA movement. I might not say the word, but it's implied. 

5 minutes ago, Snafu225 said:

Maybe it was just moved by a sub-millimeter. :D

Sorry, I just had to. @GoldForest

Okay, that was good. I can't be mad at that one. Good joke.

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

Nope. Again, movement. The context is there. Do I really need to say movement in every post?

Apparently you do because I did NOT get that context of "movement of the part in the micro" and neither did the guy you were arguing with until the third post. The only reference we had was that traveling was being done with sub-millimeter precision. Nothing about why sub-millimeter shouldn't be applied to crafts.

 

Actually I probably should be reversing my use of micro and macro, shouldn't I? Well, too late to fix that right this second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tstein said:

That is not how physics integration work. If the scale of 0.5 mm fit sin the float point  they are using (considering native type not any aberration of long number library ) it  cost zero  extra to make  the precision be  1mm or 1 cm or 1 meter.

That is fine, but unless your physics delta is extremely small and/or your calculations are extremely trivial, the inaccuracies will overwhelm that precision instantly for a game that actually runs at playable frame rates.

Hence the seconds per frame comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

Apparently you do because I did NOT get that context of "movement of the part in the micro" and neither did the guy you were arguing with until the third post. The only reference we had was that traveling was being done with sub-millimeter precision. Nothing about why sub-millimeter shouldn't be applied to crafts.

 

Actually I probably should be reversing my use of micro and macro, shouldn't I? Well, too late to fix that right this second.

All the context clues are there. 

"Placement" aka moving an object to put it into place.

Offset tool, moves parts around. 

Register, synonym for perceive.  As in perceiving motion.  (Actually, thinking about it, this one might be a stretch... so I'll give you that one.)

And if you go back to the very first post I respond to back on page 131, Vl3d mentions "I consider the misalignment a bug. We're expecting sub-milimeter precision." 

Misalignment bug, as in placement or moving the object into place.

Now, I probably should have included that in the reply, so I do apologize for that, but the context was there. It was just a page or two back. 

 

So, KSP twitter just dropped a video and a time and date. Time curtacy of KerbalSpaceP on Discord. 9am EST

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

And if you go back to the very first post I respond to back on page 131, Vl3d mentions "I consider the misalignment a bug. We're expecting sub-milimeter precision." 

Misalignment bug, as in placement or moving the object into place.

Even if you're arguing that the human eye can't detect movement of less than 1 mm, that still doesn't make sense. I assure you that if I place my finger close to your nose and move it 1 mm, you will see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vl3d said:

Even if you're arguing that the human eye can't detect movement of less than 1 mm, that still doesn't make sense. I assure you that if I place my finger close to your nose and move it 1 mm, you will see it.

1 mm yes, but 1/10th of a mm, no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Snafu225 said:

Can we come back to the implemantion/partial implemantion/non-implemantion of sub-millemeter precision and the usecase or lack of?

Or we can talk about what will be dropping Friday January 27th at 9 AM EST. 

Just now, Vl3d said:

Does the finger teleport from 0 mm to 1 mm?

No, but sub-millimeter is so small, you need special equipment to perceive the movement. You can't even move your finger sub-milimeter distances. Not unless you have some of the most stable hands in the world. Even then it would be near impossible. 

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GoldForest said:

No, but sub-millimeter is so small, you need special equipment to perceive the movement. You can't even move your finger sub-milimeter distances. 

Can you see the legs of a walking ant or is it floating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vl3d said:

Can you see the legs of a walking ant or is it floating?

Ant's don't move their legs in sub-millimeter distances. 

6 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Does the finger teleport from 0 mm to 1 mm?

Just realized what you were trying to do. 

You do realize that that's not sub-millimeter movement? That's moving your finger 1 mm. 

If you were to move your finger from location 0.0 mm to 0.1 mm, that would not be perceived. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get a room you two, I'm here for hype, not arguments about semantics.

So lemme guess, on Friday there's a Feature Episode 8/show n tell on tutorials? We already got dev diary so that's out of the question.

Ooor, perhaps, first official online tutorial on orbital mechanics?

Edited by The Aziz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Aziz said:

6zqSSuK.png

Right there. Open Mk2 cargo bay. With 6-point connector inside.

Well this changes a lot of stuff I assumed it was the mk2 radial docking port but they are shorter than the passenger module and short fuel tank.
Its also not obvious how this is connected, not the rear, and in front we see an red line, it might be the gap but looks a bit to close, but its not connected with an 1.25 meter part in front, much the same with bottom. Or why not use cool looking docking port for mk2? 
If its dropped then put an put the clam shell docking port at the rear of the crew compartment?

Agree that this is an ship designed to look cool. How practical is space planes on Duna, newer used an plane there? You bring two SSTO landers but no spare fuel from them unless the metallic tank but supposed that design was hydrogen. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

So lemme guess, on Friday there's a Feature Episode 8/show n tell on tutorials? We already got dev diary so that's out of the question.

Is that based on something or just a wild guess? Just asking out of curiousity. Edit: Okay, hit send on the post, looked at instagram and literally the first post I see is the kerbalspacep one :D

Would another Episode fit the timeline? Wondering what that could be about. What hasn't been discussed in depth? Aerodynamics? Water (considering the docks)? Science/Progression?

Edited by Snafu225
marked above
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, xXIndestructibleEVAXx said:

The width of a human hair is much smaller than one mm, and you can see hairs move smoothly and clearly.

Because hair doesn't move and stop in sub-milimeter distances. It moves much more than that.

 

13 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Get a room you two, I'm here for hype, not arguments about semantics.

So lemme guess, on Friday there's a Feature Episode 8/show n tell on tutorials? We already got dev diary so that's out of the question.

Ooor, perhaps, first official online tutorial on orbital mechanics?

It's probably a Show and Tell or Feature Video. My money's on Show and Tell because we just had a Feature Episode, too soon for another, not unless they are increasing the frequency of their postings. A dev diary we just got, yeah, so no way it will be one. 

So yeah, Show and Tell, more than likely... I'd say... 83% certainty. 

5 minutes ago, Snafu225 said:

Is that based on something or just a wild guess? Just asking out of curiousity.

Would another Episode fit the timeline? Wondering what that could be about. What hasn't been discussed in depth? Aerodynamics? Water (considering the docks)? Science/Progression?

There's ton that hasn't discussed. I mean, there's still millions of things they could do a feature episode on. 

The one I'd be most interested in is colonies. 

Anybody got the link to that timeline update of KSP 2 graph thing?

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Aziz said:

Video on colonies will probably drop between science and colony updates. It just makes sense.

They dropped an interstellar video before EA even released though. 

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...