Jump to content

KSP Loading...: No Place Like Kerbin


Recommended Posts

 

2 hours ago, MechBFP said:
2 hours ago, EasyAce said:

So how long is "rolling onto the launchpad" going to take?

... It takes about 6 hours.

Yes but they haven't started yet. So it will take x+6 hours where x is a positive, finite integer.

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

Seriously, I haven't heard The Sound Of Mainsail in a while, but the new just begs for it to go BWWWWWWUUUUUUUUUUHHHH

You can see the power in still picture.

The Vulcain 2 sounds a lot more 'whooshy' rather than a 'boom' or 'bwaaauuhh' compared to something like the F1:

Vulcain 2: https://youtu.be/HjeEaW9nSgk?t=15

F1: https://youtu.be/ouYoF9cQI44?t=121 (ignore the fake overlaid visual FX and commentary :D )

F1: https://youtu.be/6YTaG91KD5s?t=446 

Granted the acoustics will be a lot different depending on camera position but I think it puts across the vast difference in bass and resonance. I doubt the engine sound will change though from the current Mainsail sound as the engine sounds on the revamps previously have not differed extensively/at all.

Edited by Poodmund
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cleperli said:

It will probably be 1.10

I really hope they don't do that... Stellaris had no issue going from 1.9 to 2.0. It's Still Stellaris 1 (there is no 2) but v2.0. KSP should just be KSP 2.0, not KSP2

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MR L A said:

I really hope they don't do that... Stellaris had no issue going from 1.9 to 2.0. It's Still Stellaris 1 (there is no 2) but v2.0. KSP should just be KSP 2.0, not KSP2

It would be logical that 1.8.x and 1.9.x would be followed by 1.10.x

 

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

It would be logical that 1.8.x and 1.9.x would be followed by 1.10.x

 

No, it wouldn't be logical, because that's now how numbers after a decimal place are meant work. Minecraft be damned.

1.10.x does not read "one point ten" (that doesn't make sense anyway) it reads "one point one zero".

I'd much sooner follow Stellaris on this than Minecraft.

Edited by MR L A
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MR L A said:

No, it wouldn't be logical, because that's now how numbers after a decimal place are meant work. Minecraft be damned.

1.10.x does not read "one point ten" (that doesn't make sense anyway) it reads "one point one zero".

I'd much sooner follow Stellaris on this than Minecraft.

In most cases with software versioning 1.10.x is completely different from 2.0.x.

Changing the first numeral indicates a new version, seriously reworked, not just an increment on the earlier version.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MR L A said:

No, it wouldn't be logical, because that's now how numbers after a decimal place are meant work. Minecraft be damned.

1.10.x does not read "one point ten" (that doesn't make sense anyway) it reads "one point one zero".

I'd much sooner follow Stellaris on this than Minecraft.

https://semver.org/#spec-item-2

Looking like its time to read up on how semantic versioning works. :D 

EDIT: Specifically, Specification Note 2. 

Edited by Poodmund
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Curveball Anders said:

In most cases with software versioning 1.10.x is completely different from 2.0.x.

Changing the first numeral indicates a new version, seriously reworked, not just an increment on the earlier version.

 

See above :P

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

No one would complain that 1'9 is upgrading to 1'10 instead of 2'0

Someone, somewhere would complain that KSP reports itself as being 1'9 but their monitor is only showing 19".

Edited by severedsolo
Bah, lousy imperial measurements
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 9:24 PM, StrandedonEarth said:

They probably want us to find out the kerbal way: through trial and error. Like by setting up a Dres intercept, then dumping excess props only to find out your intercept is now waaaayyyyy off. 

I guess so because AFAIK there's still been no answer

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 5thHorseman said:

Every time this comes up I wish the people in charge of things decided to use ANY punctuation other than a period for versions.

No one would complain that 1'9 is upgrading to 1'10 instead of 2'0

Well, . is a symbol which have few incidents on string parsers, unlike ' (which you might need to escape, for instance as \' and, if you wanted to escape the escape sequences, because it happens, you'll end up with \\\' instead of . it sucks). It also match itself from a regular expression point of view (. being a character, it is matched by the pattern . which means any characters), which facilitates version comparison (is 1.10 greater than 1.9 ? and is 2.0 lower than 1.10 ? or is 1.10.25.2.4.5 compatible with 1.10.*). Back in the days (and I still see it on some OS who give special value to the dot in a filename), the _ was used to. But I guess the . is easier.

And well, if you used ' and " for version, people will expect the version after 1'59 to be 2' not 1'60. Because hours. So, stick with the dot. The dot is fine. And educate poeple about versioning, and soon (ok, never), everyone will have the same version scheme, and there will be no more final-v2-last.doc files.

Oh and being non-english native, the . in your number is actually a , here (and the , is just a space), which makes it easier for us to not see it as a decimal number I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, still do not like the sustainer engine look for the mainsail. The throat is far too narrow for a true first stage engine. By now I am pretty sure that the SQUAD graphics team is swapping the looks of engines optimized for high and low ambient pressure on purpose to troll us...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

While you're at it, can you add an extra warp level for longer transfers?

Might be better left in mods. The behaviour where fast warp blows through planets and SOI changes is likely not appreciated in stock play. Might be ok with more intelligent de-warping code, but that's still a bit unpredictable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ExtremeSquared said:

Might be better left in mods. The behaviour where fast warp blows through planets and SOI changes is likely not appreciated in stock play. Might be ok with more intelligent de-warping code, but that's still a bit unpredictable.

That's a good point. If KSP is no longer restricting warp to altitude, are people going to start warping through planets?

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

I understood that just the advanced tweakable users will be able to do this.

So everyone then. Considering there isn't much logic between what's "advanced" and what isn't, I would bet most people turn advanced tweakables on. Interesting to see if it can be turned off though.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...