Jump to content

DasValdez KSP2 Interview Information

GoldForest

By GoldForest
in Prelaunch KSP2 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
55 minutes ago, NoMrBond said:

Are we getting the ability to assign engines to different control schema?

i.e. right-click > you respond to RCS controls now etc?

Well, we can do that in KSP 1 now, so they might bring it over to KSP 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Bosun said:

Merchant Mariner, tall-shipper, and all round boat guy here:  

It's not a dry dock.  "Dry" implies the removal of the ship from it's operating environment.  If it is designed to operate in a vacuum, with no gravity, a 'dry dock' would mean removing the ship into a pressure-controlled chamber with artificial gravity and atmosphere.   Launching a ship into a body of water is similar to launching a rocket from a planet, into space.  Where it belongs.  

One of my BIGGEST pet peeves in space games is the use of the term 'dry dock.'  It is simply, a 'dock.'  That's all.  No 'dry.'  Also, it wouldn't be a dry dock in space.  It's already dry.  Nothing was wet to begin with.  It's an Air-dock, or Pressure-Dock.  Not a 'dry' dock.   Instead of "Yeah, I'm getting hauled out", the phrase in space-faring would be more aptly, "Yeah, I'm getting hauled in," or "My ship's in on the dock," etc.  Or maybe "My ship's chambered at the moment, another 3 weeks til launch again."  That's elegant, even.  Chambered.  Heh.

Also - shipyard would work.  Sometimes shipyards HAVE dry docks.  But not all do.  

Finally - Ships have many things that happen to them in yards and docks, and dry docks, but the only reason you would EVER go through the trouble of hauling a ship out on the dry, is for hull testing, or for work that requires holes, or patching, that cannot be accomplished with the ship in it's operating environment.  Minor welds above waterline, painting, even sometimes engine repair and removal/replacement, can allll be done while the ship's in the water.  Dry dock is always a last resort.  It's expensive, and time consuming and all around will add 3 weeks to whatever estimated time of repair you had in mind.  ;)

Another pet peeve - I always see 'welding' happening in these 'space dry docks' everyone likes to mislabel.  You know what I don't see?  I don't often see connections for power, life-support, or water.  In a dry dock situation, you shut your generators down.  You shut ship-board power supplies down.  Shut your water-makers or reclamation down. If you HAVE to get hauled out for any reason or even go to a yard and pay for slip space while you're there, you CAPITALIZE on that time, and do any and every project you think you can, even if it might not directly need it, because you're paying to be there, and don't want to come back soon. 

Most likely, you're in yard because one of those needs maintenance, which requires you be hooked to station support while it's off line for the ship to continue functioning.  Which means cutting a hole in the side of the boat or the deck, to remove the unit and repair/replace it.  In the mean time, you run systems support lines to the ship like an IV at a hospital, so that those living aboard during the yard period have running water, heat, power, food.  You have multiple connections to the ship where entry ramps for crew, ports for stowage and dunnage, and things like trash and waste can be transferred back to the yard for disposal, and access to normally-sealed ports where maintenance and equipment can attend to business.

If any one of you folks ever designs a game that has space ports - please, please consult a real sailor about what goes on in yards and dry docks.  We'd be HAPPY to help you create a plausible, immersive ship yard in your game.  


And for the love of all that is holy - if you're making a ship for Elite Dangerous - consult someone who knows something about physics.  You will never have a ship that has no space for plumbing, coolant lines, or any other machinery space that actually runs the ship, and you would never, EVER put a guest quarters right up against a bulkhead that has a massive engine behind it, which is literally just a magic nozzle, because where is the actual engine attached to it going to go?  ::Sigh::  


To reply to the original idea:  Call the object the Orbital Assembly Module, Space Assembly Module, or Colonial Assembly Module or something similar.  I feel like 'Module' would work well with some combination of acronymmable adjectives.

Space Dock is my vote. 

Although, I wouldn't be opposed to it being called a dry dock. Star Trek calls it a dry dock and I believe Star Wars does as well. It's just easier phrase to remember and the term could be adopted to spaceships. In terms of space, the dry dock surrounds the spaceship and keeps it safe from orbital debris in my opinion. It could use deflector shields or regular shields or maybe even some weapon to disintegrate the material heading towards the space dock.  

Terms are adapted and changed all the time. Dry Dock may change in our future when we start building things in space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superfluous J

Superfluous J

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Jollyrodger said:

I thought something like this but instead OAB (Orbital Assembly Building) I know its not a building in space but I just like saying OAB.

Vacuum Assembly Building. VAB. We'll know which one it was from context.

Aside: When I started I thought the VAB was the Vertical Assembly Building. I couldn't figure out why the SPH was not the HAB, Horizontal Assembly Building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, 5thHorseman said:

Vacuum Assembly Building. VAB. We'll know which one it was from context.

Aside: When I started I thought the VAB was the Vertical Assembly Building. I couldn't figure out why the SPH was not the HAB, Horizontal Assembly Building.

lol, HAB... 

Anyway, Vacuum Assembly Building doesn't work.... because there is no building. 

And the fact that the only limitation on the size of the work space is the size of the Space Station Assembly Truss, that term is kind of misleading. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superfluous J

Superfluous J

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

lol, HAB... 

Anyway, Vacuum Assembly Building doesn't work.... because there is no building. 

And the fact that the only limitation on the size of the work space is the size of the Space Station Assembly Truss, that term is kind of misleading. 

The building is going on inside the framework, of your ship ;)

In fact, it's more apt to call it a "building" than a building is. Those should be called "builts"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bosun said:

How about Colony Construction Container and Pad (CCCP).  

*Soviet Anthem intensifies* 

Just now, 5thHorseman said:

It's just a joke. "Build" is a verb. "building" is something you do. When you're done building, that thing is built.

"The Empire State Building" implies that it's not finished, if you think about it.

 

Ah, okay. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drakenred65

Drakenred65

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, theJesuit said:

Dry dock is too navalish.  Spacecraft are cans of spam, not sardines?

Anywho.  So VCD? Vacuum Construction Dock.  It may take an evening to complete a better one.

NSBDO?

(Not Some Big Dumb Object. IE its not like Poor Larry Nivens Ringworld)

NABDO (Not A Big Dumb Object

JAKO (Just Another Kerbal Object) 

BKO (Big Kerbal Object)

KOS (Kerbal Orbital Shipyard(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
theJesuit

theJesuit

Posted
Posted

SCIF

Space Construction/ Integration Facility

especially if you can take a craft as is, bring it inside and dock to the the 'launchpad dock thing' , which removes it from the game, and then use the SCIF building to add to it (hint hint), which then launches it again in flight with the original components and resources still in place if no more are available.

Or even 

SCRUF

Space Construction (Re/Un)assembly Facility

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, theJesuit said:

SCIF

Space Construction/ Integration Facility

especially if you can take a craft as is, bring it inside and dock to the the 'launchpad dock thing' , which removes it from the game, and then use the SCIF building to add to it (hint hint), which then launches it again in flight with the original components and resources still in place if no more are available.

Or even 

SCRUF

Space Construction (Re/Un)assembly Facility

 

Ooo… I never thought about live editing of an active vessel. That would be interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
theJesuit

theJesuit

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

Ooo… I never thought about live editing of an active vessel. That would be interesting. 

Yup.  Have two SCRUFs and you can combine crafts perhaps. 

Different size SCURFs mean different dimensions and possibly mass sizes as well. 

Have SCRUFs recycle vessels or parts as the ExtraPlanetary Launchpads recyclers do.  I think it has been mentioned that building off world requires resources?

Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Klapaucius

Klapaucius

Posted
Posted
On 9/1/2019 at 4:35 PM, GoldForest said:

Radiation concerns: I don't know how I feel about having to deal with fallout. This makes me think that a full fledged life support system will be in the game, which I honestly don't want. Hopefully it is an option that can be turned off. On the other hand, it would be interesting to accidently nuke a colony and then find that it's uninhabitable for the next few years or you have to do decontamination somehow. 

I don't see this as any different from any other engine.  Put a Kerbal underneath a Mastadon and they probably die.  All they are saying is you have to think about the propulsion you are using. Does it fit the circumstance?  There currently is no "life support" in KSP per se, but Kerbals get killed all the time.  The idea is to build well and not let that happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
  • Author
Posted
34 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

I don't see this as any different from any other engine.  Put a Kerbal underneath a Mastadon and they probably die.  All they are saying is you have to think about the propulsion you are using. Does it fit the circumstance?  There currently is no "life support" in KSP per se, but Kerbals get killed all the time.  The idea is to build well and not let that happen.

Yes, but when asked about radiation, Nate said no comment. 

Yes, a nuclear bomb going off will kill any Kerbal and destroy any building within the blast radius. That's not what I'm concerned about. 

I'm concerned about the radiation. If radiation is a problem in game, I'm concerned on how. Will it make it to where you can't use the colony or will it start giving the Kerbal's radiation sickness, will it make it to where you can't launch rockets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drakenred65

Drakenred65

Posted
Posted

Thing is by definition that is a game breaker when you think about it, so don’t start jumping to silly conclusions and start thinking that right out of the box that going to anywhere but the mun is a one way suicide trip cuz RADIATION!

 

seriously the Russians dropped a freakin 50 meg nuke on top of all the other testing we have done on this planet and I’m sure you did nit die of cancer by the 1990s, never mind Chernobyl’s and Fukushima.

Seriously no game developer is that freaking stupid....ok we live in a reality where Superman 64 was a thing so there is that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Drakenred65

Drakenred65

Posted
Posted

Ok I think I see the problem.

 

some people want to go “hold my beer” and be a basicaly be a dumbass.

 

im sure that if you really want to you can build a Orion and load it with 1 meg nukes and launch with a big enough payload that your initial velocity is less than .1m/s 

 

and if the resulting collateral and radiation damage means you have to repair everything at KSP then you can roll back to hanger.

 

if you don’t want to do a rollback to hanger,  then all I can say is don’t be a dumbass in the first place.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...