All Activity

The issue is that we aren't getting what we were promised. First it was KERB every 2 weeks. Then every month. Then once during a month. It has already been 6 weeks since the last one. On top of that, we were told that the hope was patches every 6-8 weeks...but we are at 3 months and counting since the last one. It is an endless cycle of being promised something, hoping it is true this time, then finding out it is more corp-speak. I think we have a legtitimate beef on this. No, but they are pretty integral to actual ships and their designs. Robotics and the ability to use pistons, hinges, and other folding parts opens up all kinds of design considerations. While I agree with the overall sentiment, I have to admit it is hard to be understanding when the goalposts continue to be moved. And we aren't privy to the resources they have. Being backed by a major game publisher, we have to assume they have ample resources to do their jobs, which they currently really haven't proven they are doing. We have bugs persistent since launch, yet they think grid fins are the way to go. People complain about something as simple as the font, yet instead of fixing that they are telling us all how much they enjoy playing the game and they can't wait to show us. They aren't listening, and without knowing what they are in fact doing we have no choice but to assume they aren't doing anything meaningful.

Life support, and the need to ship food and supplies to your space station would be oh so so sweet. I really enjoy pretending that I’m running a real life space program and that would go a long way. I normally run fake supply runs just for the role play of it.

Floor 4757: You find yourself in the Epsilon Indi star system at a planet called New Africa. Orbiting this planet you see a moon. This moon seems to violate physics as this moon orbits the planet once every 86 seconds. You have found the legendary moon Mitterand Hollow. 214404232024

This is over the top. The same roadmap is still there—colonies, interstellar, resources, multiplayer. At each stage we can gauge the deliverables. Folks don’t get fresh info for a couple months and we’re all back to chicken little acrimony. How about a little chill. I don’t disagree with life support, I think there’s real bang for buck there. Robotics would be great too but aren’t as integral to a functioning resource system which is the real spine of a live-off-the-land fleshed out colony system. More planets and interstellar are coming, code and money are probably out and for mods. Just to point out the obvious: I care quite a bit about KSP, it was my favorite game for many years, I check this forum daily, and still there is no player for whom KSP is a bigger part of their lives than the people who are currently working on this game. If the worst thing imaginable happened and KSP got cancelled you will all move on with your lives with no disruption. Thats not the case for the people at intercept. Take a moment as a fellow human being to acknowledge that these folks are all pouring their careers into a very cool thing that is for you a pleasant distraction. Definitely give feedback. Definitely give negative feedback. But be real and treat these folks like they’re humans doing their best with the resources they have just like you are with whatever it is you do. Speak your mind, but be patient and be chill. No one likes to be harassed at work and nothing about a video game is worth harassment.

I take the only remaining hill by force and recruit jebediah kerman as my bodyguard. His salary is paid in snacks.

Floor 4756: A real-scaled up Ike spinning around in an empty blackness. You barely make out a voice as your craft orbits: "This art installation was found next to the red one..."

bump, but it would be helpful to see the amount of intrest in the idea for the devs, like a test of the mob vote precedent.

@DoomsdayDuck555, what I believe @ArmchairGravy is saying is that if you had a solid-booster that could output 1000 kN of thrust and you chose to limit it to 50%, you'd expect to be getting 500 kN of thrust instead, but the game has decided to apply that 50% value twice (but shows TWR relative to that expected 500 kN output) resulting in only 250 kN of thrust.

Here's the bug report. I'm not saying bugs won't happen, I'm saying easily captured bugs should not have passed a play test. It's pretty obvious they are not play testing the game.

is TWR set for vacuum? that might make enough difference.

Try and circumnavigate minmus with a rover or hoper without going above 100m above ground level. You start at the monument and must go around the planet (roughly), cross over the exact opposite side of the planet, then return to the minmus monument in the shortest amount of time possible. Just an idea, my best time is 7 min

@JeDoesStuff Congratulations on completing the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 1! Your video was very well made and was fun to watch, especially with the little quirks like the barrel roll you threw in. I was impressed the most by the Tylo landing. I had to watch it a few times to fully pick up on how you made it work. I haven't seen many SSTOs that double up on the NERVAs on just 1 1.25 meter tank, and that second one really helped you hold altitude while shaving off so much speed. The loss of control at the very end of your Kerbin return had me on the edge of my seat until you were able to prevent a hard splashdown. Overall, I found your SSTO's design very efficient, very refined, and incredibly thoughtful. I found the extra landing gear being deployed to elevate the craft for launch very clever as well. I do have question though, I am assuming that your air intakes are somewhere inside the central core of the craft? I looked for them but have missed them. I'll add your entry to the leaderboard in the meantime, but until then, well done!

Yes, SRB's in the latest edition have their limiters doubled vs. the published amount. Put a Flea on a command pod, set the TWR to 1.5 in the VAB and it won't leave the launchpad because the actual limiter has been doubled. 5 minutes of play testing would have revealed this.

That is fair, although they still have consider that pushing out all the roadmap content is not a great idea if the players ultimately don't want to engage with it because the game becomes too irritating/frustrating to bother with. They absolutely still need to address some of the main pain points in stride with the roadmap.

What do you mean? Your previous rockets had their thrust limiters set to half their values?

I recently watched Nate’s interview and it really seemed like the devs are trying to bang out the roadmap stuff quickly, then they will go back and add QoL and requested features. For example, Nate mentioned commnet systems, science archive, and alarm clock all as things that the team wants to add but are prioritizing below roadmap.

@CobaltWolf, I found some weird thing about the drag force of x15 fuselage. At Mach 1.4 / 15000m, the total drag is 71kN, which might be too big for a plane of this size. Then I set “dragModelType = none” and “useInternalDragModel = True”, the total drag becomes 42kN at Mach 1.5 / 14000m. I think this would be more reasonable, and the final speed is Mach 4.2 / 22500m.

I completely agree with the suggested additions and I really hope they add them in the future. Most of these probably will be added throughout the roadmap though (I can definitely see things like life support being added as a separate difficulty mode). And I don’t personally have a problem with the game’s price. I’m just holding out until all of these are added and I’d they’re not, then chances are the game is going be still one of the greatest of all time.

Bold of you to assume it's even reached that point yet. As for me personally, I shelved it a few weeks ago once I hit the docking bugs when I tried to go interplanetary. That and I just have less time in general these days.

Better engine, deeper simulations and features, life support, bigger planets, maybe different planets, better robotics with capacity to program routines or outright just write code for the game like kOS, a proper race to space type career, budgeting, literally anything that isn't just the first game with "better" graphics + 3 mods and thinking that's somehow ever gonna be worth $50.

I'm going to use a specific example to illuminate a greater problem with QA testing of KSP2. In the most recent update solid rocket boosters were subjected to twice the throttle limit. This meant several of my rocket designs were no longer working. It's obvious this build was not play tested. The focus of the devs so far seems to be with QA testing (does x cause the game to crash) vs. playtesting (do the engines still work correctly). What the game has consistently failed at so far is to show me someone in development actually plays the game.

I'm sure you have a lot to say I'd wager a guess it's like KSP 1, but with colonies and interstellar travel

Never allow more than one ModuleManager to be present in your installment. Some older DLLs don't have enough meta-data to allow KSP 1.12.5 (and only it, previous releases were a yet worst mess!) to try to figure out what to load. Being not bad enough, I have evidences that some rigs are prone to fire up more than one instance of MM at once when this happens, and you end up having race conditions on the patching - this really screws up things. This appears to victim MM 4.2.3 in special because, in the majority of the situations where a doppelgänger is also running, the most evident problem is the Localization's patches being screwed (with nodes copied inside themselves, really a mess). I could only detect this one by eye balling the ConfigCache - a very tedious task... Since it's not feasible to determine in advance which DLL is safe to have as a doppelgänger and which is not, the safest and easiest way out of the mess is to avoid having more than one Module Manager DLL in your rig as it would be plague (what, in essence, ends up being sometimes). As a matter of fact, I'm diagnosing some complex installment and decided to install MM 4.1.4 and 4.2.3 at the same time to see what happens with the patching on KSP 1.12.5 (MacOS). This ended up allowing 4.1.4 to be ran instead of 4.2.3, as the following log entry demonstrates: [LOG 21:50:19.605] ******* Log Initiated for Kerbal Space Program - 1.12.5.3190 (OSXPlayer) en-us ******* Kerbal Space Program - 1.12.5.3190 (OSXPlayer) en-us <yada yada yada> ************************************************************************ Environment Info Unix 7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF Args: KSP -crash-report-folder /Users/lisias/temp/ksp Mod DLLs found: Stock assembly: Assembly-CSharp v0.0.0.0 Scale_Redist v1.0.0.0 / v2.5.0.62 ModuleManager v4.1.4.0 ModuleManager v4.1.4.0 <----- doppelgänger!!! <yada yada yada> [LOG 21:50:48.120] [ModuleManager] version 4.1.4.0 at /Users/lisias/Workspaces/KSP/runtime/1.12.5/GameData/ModuleManager.4.1.4.dll won the election against Version 4.1.4.0 /Users/lisias/Workspaces/KSP/runtime/1.12.5/GameData/ModuleManager.4.2.3.dll So, and assuming that you just installed things by unzipping the whole contents without removing unwanted things after (the most usual M.O. on userland), it's pretty unlikely that MM 4.2.3 would be causing any trouble for you, because 4.1.4 would be the one being run, perhaps twice (I never managed to reproduce this MM being ran twice behaviour on my rig, it appears to be tied to some CPU models). So, in a nutshell, never, ever allow more than one Module Manager be present in your whole rig. === == = POST EDIT Well... I did this test: tried the GDLV3 stock craft on a test bed exactly like this one. In one test session, I used MM 4.2.3, and in another I used 4.1.4. In both cases, the ConfigCache generated were identical (compared char by char). There's no way MM 4.2.3 would caused the problem you depicted. In both cases, the image I got was: Whatever is happening on your rig, changing to MM 4.2.3 must be a coincidence. But, to be certain, I suggest you do what I did: Install MM 4.2.3 on this test bed. Delete ConfigCache. Fire it up, fly the GDLV3 and see what happens Rename the ModuleManager.ConfigCache to ModuleManager.ConfigCache.mm423. Remove MM 4.2.3, install 4.1.4. Fire it up, fly the GDLV3 and see what happens Rename the ModuleManager.ConfigCache to ModuleManager.ConfigCache.mm414. Compare both ConfigCache for differences. I think this may be related to VRAM (there are too many programs using video et all opened? On my old potato, I could not watch Youtube and play KSP at the same time!). Perhaps deleting the Settings.cfg and the PartDatabase.cfg (on the same place where the EXE file is) would help? If nothing helps, post your full KSP.log (quit KSP before copying the file, to prevent KSP from truncating it) after reproducing the problem again. I would like to see it to check if I find something on it that I recognize.

I would argue that releasing the game in the state that it was it was a pretty big risk. But I would say something like KSP 2 doesn’t really need or even deserve risk. It’s a sequel to the OG. What risks exactly do you take?