St4rdust

KSP Loading... Preview: New ESA Parts

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Gydra54 said:

I don't really get the "prebuilt" sentiment. It's not like they're giving you the entire rocket to drag and drop, they're giving you pieces that you can use however you desire and combine with whatever other parts you wish. I can say that for me, I've used plenty of the SLS parts to make things that are not remotely like an SLS, and the making history parts to make things that are not remotely like any Apollo spacecraft, for example. That said, for balance and part sizing reasons, I understand the compromise they made for the accuracy of the recreation.

True. But like the MEM, the new probe body and fuel tank have a single use and it's very difficult to make them work with anything else. However, the SLS and most of the Apollo parts can fit into many other original designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nertea said:

Please, for the love of pete, just fix this. Then I'll shut up.

Do you not like foil, If you don't just remember you added a foil variant to a nuclear super soaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Streetwind said:

IMHO, "oh no the proportions are somewhat off, but it works in practice" is a far better compromise than "the proportions are slighty better, though still not right, and it is overpowered to the point of making it impossible to believably replicate the missions it is supposed to be used in."

@Streetwindis right on here.  If the Ariane 5 in game was a 3.75 core, it would end up throwing 60 tons into LKO, no sweat.  The 2.5m one puts up a little over 20 tons - which coincidentally is how much the real Ariane 5 ES lofts to LEO.  More over, the Bepi and Rosetta spacecraft I feel would have been out of scale to other probes at 3.75.  4 ion engines on that size of probe would take a heck of a long time to slow it down, for instance.

So there are other concerns besides just getting the perfect part size ratio.  KSP isn't a historical recreation game, but we're very happy to see mods that push it in that direction!  

We have some great content that we've partnered up with the ESA to deliver, and there's also quite a few parts that are usable in a general purpose fashion, and there's still some great looking stuff coming up. (Comets!)  

Finally, while yes, the Bepi parts are a little specific to that mission - I'm sure some creative uses will be found.  Here's one our team likes, courtesy of @Just Jim

kPj5yiV.png

I06SETx.png

Edited by Maxsimal

Share this post


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

We're playing in a 1:11 scale toy universe with relatively overpowered toy parts and ample artistic liberty in the destinations that exist. You'll have to allow for that same artistic liberty to be taken when trying to convert real-life spacecraft into the toy universe. Because no matter how you try and twist it, something is always going to be off. The trick is finding the solution where the thing that ends up being off is something that doesn't break the game.

In the immortal words of HarvesteR (I think?):

"KSP is a game first, a simulator second."

Share this post


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

Well, I expect them to have no or next to no mass and be physicsless. That should mostly solve the drag and part count issues. And to avoid the floating problem you have to move them into the right position.

Currently, "physicless" in KSP means the mass and drag of a part is assigned to the part's parent in the craft part tree.  And at least the mass can't be zero, for various reasons.  So that means there will be some impact, but considering how small the minimal part mass can be (can't remember off the top of my head), it should be trivial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please avoid joke replies. Some comments have been removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Maxsimal I think the parts look pretty awesome, especially with what @Just Jim is showing off in the image you posted! Can you <if possible> clarify if those are flags or actual decals in the show and tell images in the OP? I feel silly that I cannot really tell for certain based on the image, but am leaning towards the idea of decals. Any insight would be awesome! Also, to all of the devs: keep up the spectacular work!!

 

001006122020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep I'm not a fan of these overly-specialised, overly-complex parts either. Same thing in Making History -- I love the spherical modules but the decoupler should have been a different part; the MEM is much too complicated, almost a craft in its own right. Some of these have similar issues. Give us more space Legos, not pre-assembled kit parts.

Decals and part variants are cool of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Brikoleur personally I like the idea of having better looking probes. Makes making probes that look, well, proper <my opinion ofc> so so much simpler. I remember some 6 years ago when NASA did its Ladee (Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer) mission I tried to replicate the mission to middling success.

For reference as seen on Wiki: Wiki's picture of LADEE.

And my attempt:

hqk4vuL.png

In all fairness, we have 10 various probe cores: pictured below:

RCyEBv3.png

Now, I know mods provide more choices, but, in stock, these 9 are it. While, yes, in my parts thing on screen left you see 2 probes I did not use for this post, those are from the KIS/KAS suite of mods, and being mods are not relevant for my point. I love the idea of having more specialized probe cores. I know our opinion differs and I just wanted to give my opinion as a rebuttal to counter point your point :) In the end, its all up to our imaginations as to what we make and where we call our fun fun :) Happy flying :)

 

011406122020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/11/2020 at 6:34 PM, Jacke said:

Currently, "physicless" in KSP means the mass and drag of a part is assigned to the part's parent in the craft part tree.  And at least the mass can't be zero, for various reasons.  So that means there will be some impact, but considering how small the minimal part mass can be (can't remember off the top of my head), it should be trivial.

Wait, why can’t it? I was under the impression that if you didn’t have any mass on a physicsless part it just would add zero to the mass of the parent part. 
 

I mean, I know paint isn’t massless in real life, but I just don’t know of the problems that arise from making it that way in KSP.

Edited by RyanRising
linked to a more specific wikipedia article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, RyanRising said:

Wait, why can’t it? I was under the impression that if you didn’t have any mass on a physicsless part it just would add zero to the mass of the parent part. 

In theory a physicsless part with no mass should be possible because they are essentially only a modification of the parent part. (Until you flip the "physicsless" switch in the part description and the game freaks out.) But I don't know if there are any limitations in the game engine that prevent that, I could imagine problems with "division by zero" errors even if the result of that division isn't actually used later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Maxsimal I think the parts look pretty awesome, especially with what @Just Jim is showing off in the image you posted! Can you <if possible> clarify if those are flags or actual decals in the show and tell images in the OP? I feel silly that I cannot really tell for certain based on the image, but am leaning towards the idea of decals. Any insight would be awesome! Also, to all of the devs: keep up the spectacular work!!

 

001006122020

As many people have speculated, they're physicsless parts that can be surface attached to a variety of things, with conformal shapes the player can select.  So they have minimal impact on game performance.  

So if you're asking are they technically decals, as far as graphics engine technology goes, then no, they're not decals or projected textures.  They serve the same purpose though, and you can even attach them to fairings. 

Edited by Maxsimal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Maxsimal interesting! Thank you for taking the time to respond and clarify things! Really appreciate that!

 

051506122020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the 'game first, simulator second' philosophy.  It doesn't matter much to me to have perfect recreations of particular hardware when Kerbalised.

The scales of the Kerbal universe don't match real life, as it's a game.  We do after all have mods to help us if we wish to be more serious about it all, but having that as a starting point wouldn't be as inclusive for those looking for a fun space game.

As regards the utility of mission specific Kerbalised parts, they don't take away from the game, only add.  We are not obliged to use them if we don't want to, almost the same way as we are not obliged to use DLCs or mods to play the game.

In short - thank you Squad for continuing to expand our creative possibilities!  I look forward to enjoying these additions and perhaps other future collaborations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all, I think it's definitely much better than what we were shown earlier this month, the probe core is a little bit iffy but not horrible. The magnetometer is a great addition, we can finally make those Voyager 1 & 2 replicas, Cassini replicas etc. The MTM stage is all right, It's definitely a good looking final stage to boost your probe to another planet! :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Magnetometer experiment better include some good science logs for all the bodies, or ill be VERY disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2020 at 5:52 PM, Clamp-o-Tron said:

I really hope that the mainsail revamp isn't going to be our version of the Vulcain.

I don’t have a problem with that :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon me, I'm not so versed in everything that happened with the irl mission where we get these parts, can someone explain to me what that magnetoboom thing is supposed to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/12/2020 at 2:00 AM, AHHans said:

Thanks. But that's not actually rocket science.:cool:

No, it:s computer science ;)

On 6/12/2020 at 3:14 AM, Nertea said:

Please, for the love of pete, just fix this. Then I'll shut up.

Uh, IRL you have many different foil types.. different manufacturers, design requirements, etc.

 

----

Looking forward to this and looking good!  Kindof on-board with the sentiment of not liking the "one-piece" parts (have never used the MEM, for example) but can understand the reasoning behind it. And we'll get several new general purpose "lego" parts. Especially liking the science boom.

Anyway, shouldn't really complain about free updates now, should we? LOL.  Keep up the great work, @Squad!

 

Edited by micha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Yellowburn10 said:

Pardon me, I'm not so versed in everything that happened with the irl mission where we get these parts, can someone explain to me what that magnetoboom thing is supposed to do?

it’s a big stick that measures magnetic fields I think. It’s a smol little package that extends to like 9001 yottameters.

 

 

maybe just 9000...

On 6/11/2020 at 6:08 PM, Jebediah Kerman Jr. said:

But like the MEM

my bruh I like the MEM. It looks nice imho

On 6/10/2020 at 4:05 PM, EchoLima said:

Will there be a new science experiment for the magnetometer?

I hope so. I always loved big extendable booms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Philae needs tiny claws!

*pinchy pinchy*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And they should be damaged, otherwise it's simple and unrealistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HansonKerman said:

I don’t have a problem with that :/

Well its not really true to reality. The Vulcain is more like the Skipper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Clamp-o-Tron said:

Well its not really true to reality. The Vulcain is more like the Skipper.

Kerbals are not humans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HansonKerman said:

Kerbals are not humans

Yes, but in this case these parts are meant to be used as direct replicas. In this case, the Skipper looks more like the Vulcain 2 (the engine used on Ariane 5) than the Mainsail (which looks more like the Vulcain 2.1).

saf2017_0222005_cover_500x250.jpg

skipper.jpg

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.