St4rdust

KSP Loading preview Rockomax Conglomerate RE-M3 "Mainsail"

Recommended Posts

I'll add that working alone is faster than working in and/or with a team. There's an overhead to coordination of people, which is often forgot by anyone when you're trying to estimate the total time needed. For instance, each of the step @Nertea's outlined would all need to go through - at least - a validation. Not necessarily a big long discussion, but you do not want to work on your UV mapping if the model will be changed later (because, a part or all of your work will then be lost). And at times, it can takes long meetings (like half a day), with stress, conflict and milestones to meet.

It's not because you're two that you work twice faster than just one guy. So yes, everyone working inside a team have to make with all the other teams. And for being a sysadmin guy, meaning I'm usually at the end of the process where I have to make things work, I tend to being glad with whatever you deliver if it's working (bonus point if it does not falls into pieces during my days off), not if it's the best I think I could have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some posts have been removed.

Guys, political discussions that are not directly related to spaceflight are not allowed on the forums.  This includes making comparative references to past political events.

 

Let's keep the politics elsewhere on the internet, alright?

Thank you for your understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks developers. KSP is one of the few products I have that is being updated for so long.

The other ones are Windows 7, a SmartTV and a Smartphone, but they don't cost me only 15 bucks.

Edited by airtrafficcontroller

Share this post


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

Thanks developers. KSP is one of the few products I have that is being updated for so long.

The other ones are Windows 7

Hard to break it to you but that one just ended, like, today.

 

About the work time discussion, I think there is a bit more than that: they only showed us the looks, but I have a feeling that the whole product is actually finished - with emmisive textures (more work) exhaust particles in the right place (even more work), gimbal, node placement, basically, anything to make the model work in the game. 

Honestly, I know someone in gamedev industry, their team couldn't figure out how many blades the propeller should have on a plane they were working on.

It really takes days of work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My constructive feedback:

1. Slightly reduce the nozzle size. Maybe to 80 or 75% of what this is.

2. Remove the tankbutt and make it a seperate structural part, since we need more parts to work with 1.875m. 
This would also make the engine far more flexible in use considering you don't have to deal with a massive 2.5m adapter each time you want to use.

3. Give the engine more detail with an option to remove the cover. 

4. Make the cover more shiny to make it really look the Vulcain engine which this design is based off.

5. Consider modeling the nozzle and exhausts to make it look more like the Vulcain 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest, Squad, your recent art revamps are bad. They are not worth the effort you, I'm sure, are making. If I were you, I'd give up on redrawing the parts, let modders do it instead and just focused on QoL features of the game. You could, for example, make stock analogs of KAC or, if you still want to give work to your designers, add some face variations to kerbals. It would be a much better improvement of the game, which is nearing its end-of-life, than changing one amateurish texture for another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, garwel said:

Let's be honest, Squad, your recent art revamps are bad. They are not worth the effort you, I'm sure, are making. If I were you, I'd give up on redrawing the parts, let modders do it instead and just focused on QoL features of the game. You could, for example, make stock analogs of KAC or, if you still want to give work to your designers, add some face variations to kerbals. It would be a much better improvement of the game, which is nearing its end-of-life, than changing one amateurish texture for another.

Which is why I use restock.

Also, I’d say ksp isn’t nearing the end of it’s life. Ksp 2 is like a new chapter I guess; but you can always re-read the first chapter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, έķ νίĻĻάίή said:

Which is why I use restock.

Also, I’d say ksp isn’t nearing the end of it’s life. Ksp 2 is like a new chapter I guess; but you can always re-read the first chapter.

(So do I.)

We'll see, but I'll be surprised if there are substantial updates to KSP1 after 2 is released. Which doesn't mean we'll all stop playing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, garwel said:

(So do I.)

We'll see, but I'll be surprised if there are substantial updates to KSP1 after 2 is released. Which doesn't mean we'll all stop playing it.

True. I’ll never stop playing Ksp 1 

Spoiler

Why would I stop?

 

Also, what’s surprising is that the community has put more effort into their textures ( restock, GEA, etc) then it feels like the game devs have!

Spoiler

+kudos to the community 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, garwel said:

Let's be honest, Squad, your recent art revamps are bad. They are not worth the effort you, I'm sure, are making. If I were you, I'd give up on redrawing the parts, let modders do it instead and just focused on QoL features of the game. You could, for example, make stock analogs of KAC or, if you still want to give work to your designers, add some face variations to kerbals. It would be a much better improvement of the game, which is nearing its end-of-life, than changing one amateurish texture for another.

Not everybody wants to rely on mods for everything.

Edited by T1mo98

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first reaction was to like it because "whoohoo, part refresh of something that is truly starting to show its age" and " fascinating, looks like it is base on some real engine I know" (although I didn't recognize it as a Vulcain 1 / Vulcain 2.1 at first).

But the longer I look at it, the less I like it as an engine in KSP. As others have already noted it doesn't really have anything interesting about it and some have already articulated some reasons as to why it isn't a good design choice in general and for the role as "Mainsail" in particular (kudos to Nertea, LittleBitMore, et al).

It really is the first part revamp that I do not like. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old Rockomax is better, it has more greebles and actually looks like it delivers some power. Not sure what's happened to make you think that the model also needed replacing, and that the white/black pattern needed getting rid of. I don't know what happened between some time ago and now to make yall think the game needed a more realistic art style.

1 hour ago, Aerospike said:

My first reaction was to like it because "whoohoo, part refresh of something that is truly starting to show its age" and " fascinating, looks like it is base on some real engine I know" (although I didn't recognize it as a Vulcain 1 / Vulcain 2.1 at first).

But the longer I look at it, the less I like it as an engine in KSP. As others have already noted it doesn't really have anything interesting about it and some have already articulated some reasons as to why it isn't a good design choice in general and for the role as "Mainsail" in particular (kudos to Nertea, LittleBitMore, et al).

It really is the first part revamp that I do not like. :(

Ditto. Main page on Steam and website should just link to ReStock, and Squad can focus on things they're capable of doing properly, like fixing bugs.

Edited by Bej Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Ditto. Main page on Steam and website should just link to ReStock, and Squad can focus on things they're capable of doing properly, like fixing bugs.

SQUAD can't just use a mod as a crutch. They need to make money, and provide for the people who can't or don't want to use mods - for them installing Restock would be out of the question. Even if they wanted to absorb Restock into the stock game, there would probably be some serious legal issues. 

Besides - and this is my personal opinion - not all of the revamps that they've done have been as bad as this one. Look at the Ant, the Spider, the Vernor engine or the 1.25m fuel tanks - they're all pretty nice looking parts now, certainly better than they used to be, and good enough for the average player like me. SQUAD are perfectly capable of revamping parts, and IMO they've been doing a (mostly) good job. As I have stated previously, 'SQUAD vs Restock' is a matter of preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a pretty reasonable Kerbal version of the original Vulcain-I engine,  not bad or anything but just doesn't seem to grok with the kind of engine it is. If this had been for the Skipper refurb that would have clicked I think.

Are there variants coming which would drop the truncated cone/tankbutt at the top (compact variant) or offer a boattail cover?

Unless there's a specific higher level reason the Mainsail has been purposely fashioned after the Vulcain we're not privy too yet (i.e. ESA/Arianne part pack like the SLS looking parts made for the ARM pack)?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say we are reading the feedback, taking notes and discussing internally. This isn't the first or last time we will. All feedback is appreciated but it's impossible to please everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the bottom but the top gray part needs some more pizzazz added.

Share this post


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

I just want to say we are reading the feedback, taking notes and discussing internally. This isn't the first or last time we will. All feedback is appreciated but it's impossible to please everyone. 

I think something that would help a lot would be dev diaries, like Factorio's for example. Instead of just posting pics, include an explanation and walk us through the decisions and how you reached the solutions/designs you did. Would help a lot to keep the community engaged/informed and make the dev process a lot less opaque. :)

EDIT: To clarify, I mean that doing so would give us insight into your thought process, which I think would significantly... I guess cushion the response?

EDIT2: I'm tired. I'm saying I think people would like it more if they knew why it looked like that. But it's a thing that I think applies to other changes to the game.

Edited by CobaltWolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:

Besides - and this is my personal opinion - not all of the revamps that they've done have been as bad as this one. Look at the Ant, the Spider, the Vernor engine or the 1.25m fuel tanks - they're all pretty nice looking parts now, certainly better than they used to be, and good enough for the average player like me. SQUAD are perfectly capable of revamping parts, and IMO they've been doing a (mostly) good job. As I have stated previously, 'SQUAD vs Restock' is a matter of preference.

That's what irks me about the Skipper and Mainsail. I was hoping for a revamp similar in quality to the small engines, which were quite detailed, especially for their size, and departed from the old models significantly to achieve that look. Both Mainsail and Skipper should have been done in the same style, with exposed plumbing, proper gimbals and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nestor said:

All feedback is appreciated but it's impossible to please everyone. 

Oh sure, I absolutely agree and understand that... but if you're going to spend time and effort changing something in the game then you must be looking to get at least a positive net gain otherwise you may as well just have not done it in the first place:

rew7xmB.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NoMrBond said:

It's a pretty reasonable Kerbal version of the original Vulcain-I engine,  not bad or anything but just doesn't seem to grok with the kind of engine it is. If this had been for the Skipper refurb that would have clicked I think.

Well it certainly is a pretty good analogue of the original Vulcain engine (or apparently also for the new upcoming Vulcain 2.1 for Ariane 6, as that one re-introduces those 2 turbopump exhaust pipes that run all the way down the engine bell).

But for me there are at least 3 things that feel "wrong" about this design:
1) The (Revamped) Skipper seems to be based on the Vulcain 2 (so basically the same kind of engine) and while that design (or rather its proportions) works great for a sustainer or upper stage engine (imho), it's appearance lacks that "MOAR POWER!!" vibe that the original Mainsail had. Simply up-scaling the nozzle compared to the rest of the engine apparently isn't enough to make it look powerful. Something along the lines of Rocketdyne F-1 would have been a better source of inspiration in my opinion ("sadly" that is already covered by the MH expansion).
2) While faithfully recreating the aeroshell that hides/protects all the plumbing and turbo machinery may make that design more true to the original, it also makes it bland and uninteresting to look at in a game. Also to me this "sleek" look again takes away from the aura of power that the old design had.
3) Those exhaust pipes are possibly the worst offender here. They already look a bit strange on the real Vulcain (at least after seeing the Mainsail revamp), but in their stylized KSP representation, they make the whole engine look outright goofy. "But this is KSP, Kerbals are pretty much the definition of goofy!" I hear you scream. But for a "Mainsail" engine, it is the wrong kind of goofy imho. I feel it should look outright ridiculously powerful, not "hey, I look like a toy" or "hey, I look like the backside of a horse".


Oh and before I forget: I too belong into the camp of people who are disappointed by the apparent lack of variants for the new mainsail and skipper revamps. After the last few engine revamps I was hoping that this would become the new norm for all engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2020 at 11:37 AM, Aerospike said:

...
Oh and before I forget: I too belong into the camp of people who are disappointed by the apparent lack of variants for the new mainsail and skipper revamps. After the last few engine revamps I was hoping that this would become the new norm for all engines.

Yup, i am in that camp as well. Variety was always key to good design possibilities.

Edited by Frank_G
misssed an s

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.