Kerenatus Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, Master39 said: I'm pretty sure that we shouldn't take the Daedalus as one of those "2 bigger sizes". I think that that the whole " 2 bigger sizes" is deliberately misleading. We have a confirmation that everything in the trailer is made with actual game assets and in the trailer they show plenty of parts that probably won't adere to the standard size system. The container system, the rover parts, the spherical tanks and the truss system will be probably way more influencing for ship sizes than the "classic" system used for rocket fairing and tanks. The prevalent thing we will probably see using the size system could be habitats and modules but being inflatables confirmed I'm not that sure. Yeah those containers don't look like they fit in "classic" size system at all lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 (edited) Why 6.x? Probably, 7.5 and 10 (3.75x2 and 5x2). KSP parts make 2 sequences: 0.625 - 1.25 - 2.5- 5 1.875 - 3.75 6.x looks excessive when there is 5. 7.5 and 10 look useful for base building and hi-tech propulsion. Edited September 9, 2019 by kerbiloid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 Just now, Kerenatus said: Yeah those containers don't look like they fit in "classic" size system at all lol. And I'm crazy curious about them, will they just be a fuel-like resource tank with an exotic shape or will it have an inventory system to transfer parts and modules? Or even a "kit" system like the MKS ones? Can't wait to know more about them, I think they're the most interesting unexplained thing in the footage shown up to date. Being a system to build station and bases directly in place confirmed I really hope for an inventory system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coyotesfrontier Posted September 9, 2019 Share Posted September 9, 2019 Sorry for the broken math, I don't know what was up with me last night, but a 1.5 increase doesn't make sense. Bartybum is correct, size increases by double, with a part size in between. I still think 7.5 and 10 make sense though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 13 hours ago, coyotesfrontier said: Sorry for the broken math, I don't know what was up with me last night, but a 1.5 increase doesn't make sense. Bartybum is correct, size increases by double, with a part size in between. I still think 7.5 and 10 make sense though. I think the 0.625 system is perfect. Yes the size differences are small, but that's what's great. Take the Orion capsule for instance. In game it would be 3.125, which happens to be the size between 2.5 and 3.75. Not only that, but 3.125 is the next logical step for making a new command capsule in KSP I'd they ever add one. It would allow for Orion replica as well as making Constellation replicas (Ares I and V) as well as SLS replicas (true to life replicas) Ares I repoca: 3.125 capsule 3.75 fuel tank for second stage 2.5 solid rocket for first stage I feel like the 0.625 system is a good standard. You have enough room to make the parts fit right to make replicas of craft, and you can just skip the sizes you don't use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coyotesfrontier Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 I feel like only certain people would want 3.125, the difference between 2.5 and 3.75 is so minor that it isn't worth it putting in a whole new size class for it. IMO, an Ares I replica would be better off with a 1.875 SRB, 2.5 upper stage, and a 2.5 capsule, but since SQUAD seems to be going for a 2.5 shuttle SRB (which doesn't really line up with the 3.75 SLS parts, but whatever), maybe a 2.5 SRB, 3.75 upper stage, and 3.75 capsule would be better. We've gone on long enough discussing this, and we're not getting anywhere, so let's just talk about the bigger sizes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerenatus Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 On 9/9/2019 at 12:35 PM, Master39 said: And I'm crazy curious about them, will they just be a fuel-like resource tank with an exotic shape or will it have an inventory system to transfer parts and modules? Or even a "kit" system like the MKS ones? Can't wait to know more about them, I think they're the most interesting unexplained thing in the footage shown up to date. Being a system to build station and bases directly in place confirmed I really hope for an inventory system. I think it's highly likely that they carry the things needed to build colony buildings and such. No point for them to make a quite exotic shaped regular fuel tank imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 13 minutes ago, Kerenatus said: I think it's highly likely that they carry the things needed to build colony buildings and such. No point for them to make a quite exotic shaped regular fuel tank imo. For resource i don't mean fuel I was talking about something like the "material kits" or "machinery" some mods uses. It's confirmed that they will transport the needed materials for a colony but there are some ways of doing it, they could bring a material resource that will be the "currency" for the BAE, they could store modules and parts in an inventory or they could transport entire sub-assemblies in a Kit form. I hope there will be all three options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinoz Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 On 9/9/2019 at 2:20 PM, GoldForest said: Nothing complicated about going up by 0.625 each step. Just a little math. Under the 1.5x size change I double the fuel in a rocket by doubling tank length or increasing to the next size. With .0625 increase there isn’t a simple rule of thumb like that. So I need the machine to reason and trail and error turns to drudge quickly.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 2.5 - 0.625 = 3 x 0.625 3.75 - 0.625 = 5 x 0.625. The step should grow. Not an arythmetic progression, but a geometric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts