All Activity

I fail to see how a Game Industry professional plans to enrich its resume by violating the EULA of a competitor (or former one, who knows nowadays). You know, their employer also has a EULA to enforce - and I really don't think such employer would be proud of their employees violating EULAs on the wild - their business model depends of EULAs being enforced! (or to hire someone that did that)

Leeky leeks from people digging through code few weeks ago

I'm genuinely curious though, have you played through the progression path more than once? Were you or do you honestly see yourself being equally engaged with the missions on second or third playthrough? My problem with the way it's done now is not that it's not engaging or fun on the first time but that it seems to lack any longevity.

Planning for the required dV for a given maneuver has nothing to do with your burn time prediction though. Many players in KSP1 had some kind of a vessel or satellite just to plan maneuvers with. I don't understand why these are built to be so heavily connected in the first place but it does explain a few things about the issues they have with the current planner.

I like the launch ramp! You might want to make a custom height map to add support below the ramp and to taper off the edges of your plateaus. Very high vertical rock formations aren't exactly structurally sound after all. Use white for the upper end of the ramp, a lighter grey for the main plateau, gradient fill for the ramp and another gradient to blend the edges of the whole thing down to black.

What hyped me the most are the NTR plume changes. I always wanted blue/purple-ish exhausts from nuclear rockets and I have to say I'm seeing my dream come alive at last. P.S. Please! Fix flat-bottom clouds before adding multiple layers. I always have a strange feeling that flying just beneath the current clouds is like faying with sheets of paper floating above. If this problem doesn't get addressed then it would probably get worse once we have multiple cloud layers.

The EC values come from ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads/Resources/ECSmelter.cfg. There's an explanation in the config as to why it uses the settings it does. There's also a patch at WildBlueIndustries/Sandcastle/Patches/ECSmelterClassic.cfg that tries to adjust the value, but it just adds an extra config node rather than modifying the existing one. Modifying the patch as follows or adding the following patch to your own patch folder would apply the intended settings:

Nice plumes, nice clouds. I don't care about memory usage, I have a strong gaming rig, mwahahahaha Sneakpeek it soon please.

I wonder how many years it will take for the game to reach the level of playability of the first part? I hope in three years the second part will be fully playable?

Thanks for the suggestion. I had thought I had just succeeded but inspecting the screenshot closely the orbital figures were 93,822 x 86,612 m. It looks doable now, though... [click + arrows = slideshow] Just short.

You might also try placing a decoupler below the crew section (and parachutes/heatshield) for emergencies. You'd lose the rest of the craft but the crew would survive and could be rescued from the surface using some sort of prop powered plane/VTOL or rover.

This is the exact type of review we have all been wanting. Next time could you post it in the year we asked for it? I am 100% serious. To an outside observer, this game is a couple steps away from abandonware. I am not suggesting the game is going to be cancelled, I am saying the effort being put out to communicate is barely above "we aren't working on the game, so why bother?" There is, unofficially. You have to bind it yourself, but axes work, no problem. I dunno why the devs don't mention it.

N 3

In KSP 1 where manoeuvres were modelled as a single impulse, it sort of made sense to allow them to have any deltaV the player wanted, but with the KSP2 model where the manoeuvre is correctly modelled over time there's going to be issues if you exceed your real deltaV. With the new planning model the predicted acceleration of the vessel needs to change over the manoeuvre as the mass of the vessel decreases / the TWR increases and if you can exceed your vessel's deltaV then you'd either: have to special case what happens when you run out of fuel (i.e. how much does the acceleration change over time when you're burning non-existent propellant) run into the point when you have so much negative mass of propellant that your vessel has zero mass and infinite acceleration Neither of these cases make for good manoeuvre predictions. But I do understand that some sort of planning mode where you can model future missions to determine the amount of dV needed before designing the vessel would be useful.

I feel like the reason the world is so divided is because no one has the modesty or backbone to conduct extended, intense debates/arguments. If we fail more than 2-3 times to convince someone of something, we don’t have a hard look at what we’re saying to see if it’s wrong, we accuse the opponent/target of being “brainwashed” or “lacking good faith.” Idk, maybe I’m spending too much time with the people on this forum who are mostly old enough to remember Apollo or STS-1 and need to interact more with my own generation.

Because Ice Age people actually might have had varied culture and not a monolithic way of thinking across Eurasia. Hence why I said within their group. The objective of all life is to survive, no? Would you say one’s desire for food and water is an opinion? I suppose it could be. The Wendat did have punishment mechanisms for things people agreed were bad, like murder. Instead of punishing individuals, the whole clan would have to pay tribute to the clan of the slain person, creating an incentive to prevent others from committing murder. Kandiaronk said this was more effective in preventing crime than European punishment of the individual, but we don’t really know for sure whether that was true or not. What the Wendat did not do was force people to do something they didn’t want to. No one was forced to participate in war against another tribe if they were not convinced it was the right course. I don’t think a decision requires punishment of those who don’t agree and cooperate. Sometimes decisions involve recruiting volunteers to execute them, in which case those who oppose go unpunished because they aren’t needed. Not the case. Pacific Northwest tribes were “peasants of the fish” in that they conducted mass harvesting and processing of salmon according to the right time in the season. The environment they lived in was unsuitable for HG lifestyle because the main trees were conifers. They raided each other for slaves because the leaders could not convince their own people to take up the intense labor needed for processing salmon. But the northern Californian peoples, who lived with access to similar abundance of salmon, consciously refused harvesting salmon and preferred the hunter gatherer way of life, because they valued work for the individual and did not believe in slavery, unlike the almost bourgeoise-like leaders of the Pacific Northwest peoples who showed off their immense wealth (and shared it) during potlatch. But the Pacific Northwest people never raided the northern Californian HGs, despite being in close proximity. (The northern Californian peoples actually did keep a small number of slaves, but the institution was frowned upon and those who owned them were ostracized)

I believe ballisticfox has said it elsewhere, apparently it's because the codec (?) used for compressing the files isn't supported by the windows file explorer zip extractor however it is supported by 7zip

It ain't Saturn But it has the launch tower. But yeah I'm not gonna buy something that has done a single flight. Where my Ariane 5?

I had the same error for the UHD textures. Unzipping with 7-Zip works, weirdly. Not a site suggestion, but could you include optional KSCSwitcher configs so that we can see the launch sites from the space center view?

If I had a shot every time I saw that I'd be a hopeless drunk by now.

Why have this restriction in the first place? Just leave it off! There are many cases it still would be useful to have. Planning follow-up missions for example. Should never have been implemented in the first case!

Hmm, this is a point of discussion, but when the dev version was started to test-run future changes I reworked the fuel switches to automatically switch to methalox when CRP is detected, for an overall simpler and less error-prone setup. I don't think CC should cause the issues, as I tested specifically for that back when I made the changes. I will check again and report back. You're right, I also experience this issue now. Something must be messed up in the release, so I'll investigate.. In the meanwhile: Got a log? Can you check if it's a .craft (or part, if you pick a fresh part) issue? KSP sometimes messes up the fuel in saved crafts for no reason.

@CobaltWolf A lot of parts need to be rotated, they don't come out of the part list in the right oreintation. Also, why the size reduction? Also also, now it is unstable, really bad. I get endless aileron roll spinning and the control surfaces and RCS combined can't counteract it. Even Atmospheric Autopilot can't cope. Also also also, the extended fuselage doesn't seem to have a node. Also also also also, would you put a node on the engine to allow for vertically mounting the X-15 on rockets? Like in this picture:

Mods include but are not limited to KAS. So, I have here parts that can be placed in a ship's inventory, one is the RTS-1 Resource Transfer Station (KAS). However, this item is too heavy and too big for a kerbal to carry around. How does one use items in the inventory, that are too heavy or too big to carry?