CsendesMark
-
Posts
36 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by CsendesMark
-
-
Hello All.
Where can I get this mod?
Sadly seeing Kerbalstuff is closed, and I nobody seeding the torrent they put up
Can you please help me out?
-
It'd be kinda cool if advancing in the tech tree also upgraded the tracking center though.
In my opinion, some kind of sensor would be great, to unlock, which would be the only predecessor for the "claaaaaw".
-
Having a part that detects asteroids would be one step toward making satellites useful.
Exactly!
That's what I missing from stock KSP a lot!
There is no need to think, design, and carry out multiple missions to achieve a bigger goal, like in real world!
Yep, it's a good idea. And it was a good idea in the other 3 or more threads that presented the same concept.I did not find those, before starting this one
-
Sounds like you working at EA...
Awful Idea!
-
In real life we can spot tons of asteroids from earths surface, so this wouldn't really be more realistic.
Yeah, the huge asteroids, which scale are more from several hundred meters to kilometres in size.
But for even an "F" sized asteroid, ground based telescopes are not really an option.
-
-
Hey pal!
I have a question, why do we "get" asteroids just out of the blue when we start up a new game in carrier mode?
What I'm talking about?
Well, in short now we get a bunch of asteroids around Kebrin, but would be more realistic/challenging, aaand also more fun, if you would need to place some device on a Kebrin orbiting satellite to actually spot those rocks.
SQUAD might award us some extra science points for spotting those over time (constant slow but steady science income problem could be solved this way).
Like WISE do in our world
Give this thread a bump, if you like the idea!
Also thanks for reading!
-
The older version of PhysX used in Unity is single-threaded only. It uses this version, as I understand, to maintain compatibility across platforms.
If you want a more modern version of PhysX in KSP, go complain on the Unity forums. It's their software that needs the work; Squad is limited by the game engine in this case.
I understand that, in this case, I'm not complaining over the need of 64bit unity option either.
But how old is that old, and does unity bother to have a newer version of PhysX implemented?
-
Yep, this is the case currently, and it uses software PhysX to retain cross platform compatibility.
But doesen't PhysX supporting multi-threading? YES it IS!
However my KSP uses only 1 core for sure, the other three core's potential aren't utilized at all!
Why we don't have this option working?
Please make it work! I really don't like when my part count "kills" my game, and playing with less than 25 FPS is less fun than playing with more than 25 FPS
-
Soon?
Do you mean, They're already developing this?
If yes, Cool!
-
Hello again!
Is there a way to utilize more than one monitor?
The second would be great for additional info windows about... EVERYTHING
So, for example you could see all these windows, while you have the nice view of your vessel and stuffz
-
There's not much they can do about that. The lag will not go away be more efficient part loading. The only thing that will reduce is memory crashes.
Improving on lag requires both improvements to the physics engine on the Unity engine, and optimization of the simulation, a good bit of which came with .23.
Sorry, I think I wasn't really clear, my problem is not with the one-time waiting to start the game, I talking about the actual gameplay, when I having multiple ships and/or high part count and a very low framerate.
-
~~~
Unity is actually multi-threaded. What isn't multi-threaded is the physics, which is why KSP can't fully take advantage of multi-core processors and why even running a 2.2GHz i7 2670QM processor, I still hit single digit FPS once I hit 700-750 parts even above 160km.
And does Squad working on that matter?
Because my i7 3820 is just getting wasted, with about total 26~27% CPU load during game
-
Awesome idea!
I buyin' it!
-
I personally use the 6S service compartments and stack a single cylindrified RCS tank in there (or more for massive craft). The large RCS tank is almost exclusively for fuel tanker missions.
I use KSPX and KJR so pretty much everything else suggested would not change my playstyle at all since I use that stuff anyways.
I was just actually did that on Wasmic's advice!
KSPX and KW Rocketry + FAR + fairing mods aaand Remote tech aaaaaand scansat!
(KPS now uses around 3,2 GB od RAM, so I close to the 32bit limits
)They have the lego parts wich I been looking for
So I started a new, (my first) sandbox game to re-learn the rules, and it's pretty cool so far!
-
That has been asked for before. I don't know why it hasn't been added yet, but the KSPX addon contains just what you're looking for.
Will do!
Also planning to use the four addon which was listed at the don't ask thread. But I'm kind of new for KSP
Started with 0.23, and I wanted to find out the basics before installing all the parts! (I've just using utility stuff like Alarm clock etc)
The next update is planned to make the nodes more stable and reduce rocket wobble. Making the node size bigger would only have a small impact, as the node size doesn't matter a lot when determining joint strength. Also, if you have a problem with rocket wobble, you should try placing guidance fins on your rocket, and using generous amounts of the "EAS-4 Strut Connector".Yeah, I also red that list aaaand can't wait for the update!
Actually I didn't had that much problem with wobbly rockets, but having problem with snapping rocket during manoeuvre turns.
Thanks for the advice!
-
But what about probes?
-
you might want to go over this one more time
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/36863-What-not-to-suggest
Not I'm the one who didn't do the homework
From the not to suggest thread:
" ** this means no general 'more parts' threads. If you have specific ideas feel free to post them. "
And I been really specific.
-
I don't want alarms to be annoying.
if they add, I bet they will add an option to turn off too
-
Hello Dev Team!
I would ask for two additional parts!
#1: same as FL-R1 RCS Fuel Tank, but half as high, and also with half of propellent!
Maybe with the "strongest" connection points.
Why do I asking for this?
- Because usually I don't need that much, and don't like to break my rockets aerodynamic shape with the smaller diameter one, or the radial-mounted tanks.
- Also, no mono-propellent tank with the strongest connection point!
#2: Advanced S.A.S Module, Large, with the "strongest" connection points.
Why do I asking for this?
- When I wish to make a more stable rocket, I would add more SAS module, but the medium sized connection point makes all those configurations very weak!
Thanks in advance
-
-
von Braun's first rockets were launched as part of a German amateur rocketry group, before it was disbanded when the government banned private rocketry research...
That was funded privately, the government at the time had no interest, and did rather well (they didn't reach orbit, but they did develop something that could go up quite a ways and fly down range quite a bit as well, could have been used as a mail rocket to the German islands for example with a better guidance system.
When private research became impossible, he made up this fantastic story about rockets being able to be military weapons and approached the government, not thinking it'd ever work but might trick them into giving him money to continue his work on future space launchers now that private funding was cut off.
What about our current time?
No big wars, no big conflicts, no ban on rocket designing (in the EU and USA at least), lots of rich companies, still only a handful of private space programs...
The difference between amateurs and professionals is the big deal of €$£! That's all I say.
For Braun, the price to send Buzz and Niel to the Mün, was the same price as their weight in gold.
How many great mind out there today, who might develop a good space-vehicle, but have no money?
You will know about them when they became a member of the "big company" who grant them the necessary founds, became famous, and you can read their bio, ...and how they started as an "amateur".
-
hmm, not quite. Oberth, von Braun, Goddard, and others worked independently. ....
They might started independent... and Goddard and Braun were awful great minds, but they needed tons of money for all the research, ...and who were happy to pay that?
For Braun the German state/army was the first sponsor, then he became needed for the USA, so it's government became the new sponsor.
Korolev? He also became very precious for the Soviet. Why? Same as for the others: "Package" delivery!
Rockets were for weapons firstly... and currently mostly too.
And so many private companies like how much? ?2~3? which are capable conduct actual orbital flight (and how many flights been conducted by them? ..not much).
How many governments? RSA CNSA can only do spaceflights. NASA ESA ISRO, Iran and the Koreas can launch satellites.(and these had several thousand successful launch in +50 years)
You can argue with me, but facts are stubborn 8)
-
Interesting, but civil companies couldn't "start" a space-program on their own from the beginning!
Early rocket developing needed far more money than private companies could finance. You have to take that to account!
[1.3.1] Docking camera (KURS) (14.feb.18)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
Thanks guys, I'm waiting for the connection.
My client see no other peers so far!