NecroBones
-
Posts
4,820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by NecroBones
-
-
I've stated this elsewhere, but just so you're aware in the thread, the original intention was not to show ARM off as much has we had and then follow up in the way that occurred. Ever had to stop short on the road because you didn't see something until the last minute? That's what essentially happened here. By the time we realized the scope of the situation, we were knee deep in promotion. It's more than too late to stop what's happened, but we're already reshaping and restrategizing on ways to prevent this in the future.
Actually, I'd also love to hear about the nature of the bugs/problems that turned up. I know it's probably not standard policy to discuss broken things, but as a coder, I'm curious.
-
Now what intrigues me most about this thread is that it echoes something I've been seeing more and more of lately - a distaste for spoilers. Not that I'm a particular fan of them, myself, but what is it in KSP in particular that you would not want spoiled? What would you consider to be a KSP spoiler and how would you rather see it presented?
I'm kind of curious about this too because I love seeing the new features.Yes, very much so. To me, it's only "spoilers" when you're talking about a story. New features are interesting to see, even in a development stage, IMHO.
-
Yeah, in those screenshots, the linear difference makes it look like the new parts will be an even 4m, but there's perspective involved since the camera is angled up, and the objects are above the camera's position, so it's likely that the difference is smaller, making 3.75m a likely possibility.
But agreed, it doesn't really matter. We just need the parts. Now. lol
-
Found something crazier.
I did some Google-Fu and found this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/50242-Jool-accent-the-imposible-chalenge
Essentially, this guy managed to not only land on Jool, but TAKE OFF INTO ORBIT. And I thought Eve was scary.
I want to know what a "Jool accent" is. Is that like reverse Spanish?
-
The only thing I don't like is the lack of an Orion
Still waiting for stock payload fairings too.
-
i've never heard of any game engine changes....
so it's game engine optimization now? are they updating to a much newer unity or even the latest version when the update happens??
The main engine update that will be taken advantage of is an improved joint-physics model. Between that, and some other tweaks, the ARM update will have massively improved joint stability. We won't need 100+ struts on a heavy lifter, anymore.
-
Space has no temperature, as it is a vacuum. The temperature of an asteroid depends on the solar heat is receives (among other things). But you are right about the asteroid types.
True, but to a point you can say there is a temperature in space, as defined by the cosmic background radiation, which as I recall is about 2.7 degrees K.
-
Yeah, this is something I'm trying to plan for. I wrote a perl script (under linux) that will split out individual TXT files for each ship, flag, etc, so that I can copy/paste what I want into a new save. It'll also make copies of the tech tree, crew roster, ScanSat progress and anything else saved as a "Scenario", etc. Not the best solution for everyone, since it'll still involve manual effort. But for those who want the script, I'm happy to share:
For anyone willing to edit their own save files, but want a quick way to extract individual ships/flags/whatever, I made the above script into an online version:
-
If this is where this game is going then, I'm out of here! Seems like it's just devolving into a R.T.S type of game! All the limitations of money, reputation and science, to me, seems to detract from the original game direction of just exploring the Kerbal universe and having fun! See you in "Sand Box", or maybe not.
I'm pretty sure Sandbox mode is here to stay, and money is only for Career mode. Even then, I'm under the impression that it's more about setting budgets for missions, rather than earning and spending cash, but I could be wrong.
-
Huh, cool idea. I haven't been downloading .craft files, so this hasn't come up for me. But I can see how it might be useful.
The good news is that the save files are very straightforward, so as you've done here, the code can be very simple.
-
To me KSP is like Legos. You build something than take out in the world and play with it. like Legos, this is a game where you decide what your fun is.
Agreed. Well said!
-
My first goal will be to design new lifters to put in the subassemblies, based on payload weight supported. Last night I built test payloads with weights of 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, and 150 to test them with. I'll probably make a 200 ton test payload too. After that, we'll see.
-
This is great information! Yes, I think I need a lot of stupid Kerbals on my missions now.
-
I think in one of the interviews, the devs said that the new parts will go where the largest of the older parts were, and those in turn will unlock sooner. So I'm guessing these will be in that upper-right box.
-
I'm guessing that the reverse would be the better option. Though either way is probably very difficult to do correctly and not screw up your persistent file in the process.The reverse? *gulp* With 60 flight and 60 debris, plus science and progress tracking AND kerbals, my copy and paste is gonna have a heart-attack. Pasting EVERYTHING into a new save is simple, but very tedious.
This is still an awesome update though.
I suspect that there's a new data block associated with the asteroids that can be transplanted over, though changes to the tech tree may require edits as well. The ships/flags/crew/etc are the easy part, though the ships are MASSIVE in the data compared to everything else. Even so, I'm getting ready by splitting out ships, flags, crew, scenario data (tech tree, ScanSat progress, etc) into individual TXT files with a perl script. If anyone wants to play with the script in linux, I'm happy to share:
-
Yeah, this is something I'm trying to plan for. I wrote a perl script (under linux) that will split out individual TXT files for each ship, flag, etc, so that I can copy/paste what I want into a new save. It'll also make copies of the tech tree, crew roster, ScanSat progress and anything else saved as a "Scenario", etc. Not the best solution for everyone, since it'll still involve manual effort. But for those who want the script, I'm happy to share:
-
Maybe not so much a reskin, but it would be nice if the tank ends were more like the new SLS parts (you can see the fuel container caps, and some internal stuff).
The blank flat ends just look ugly, and it doesn't feel as if they contain fuel, they're just tubes.
Yes, this. I really want to be able to see inside the faring a little, with rounded tanks within.
On that note, I'd love to see the large ASAS module get an interior as well. I'm not sure why it's completely hollow.
-
Why not both? A lightweight, electric unit for small, long endurance drones and a fueled version for heavier lifting/higher speeds.
Yes, that would be even better.
-
My escape system is F9.
But yeah, I remember both the Columbia and Challenger incidents quite well. Very, very sad. What's interesting is that during the whole Challenger investigation, it came out that some of the engineers in the shuttle program felt that the probability of catastrophic failure was about 1 in 200. Over the lifespan of the shuttle program, it proved worse than that, as there were two catastrophic losses in 135 flights.
-
It could be possible to simulate L points though while maintaining CPU un-intensive 1-body physic. All that is needed is to have L points become invisible bodies with their own SOI. Of course L1 and L2 would not be spheres but more like Disks Of Influence, so they would need to implement non-uniform gravity or more complex code for non-spherical areas of influence. At present though you can sort of simulate L4 and L5 orbits, just put a ship in a matching orbit with your body that shifted.
I like this idea. I do hope they'll simulate them at some point, even if it's just L4 and L5, since they're the relatively stable ones.
-
Something I'd like to see added, is an option for fuel-efficient atmospheric propulsion in atmospheres without oxygen. Duna and Eve would be a lot easier to explore if we could have propellers or ducted fans (or some sort of turbofan) that run on liquid fuel +oxidizer. These could be a lot less powerful than jet engines, but a much better atmospheric option than rockets.
Sorry if this has been suggested before. But it's something that came to mind while planning planetary expeditions. Right now, Laythe is the only place worth taking aircraft.
EDIT: Now I see this in the list of "already suggested" items. Though in there, one of the links doesn't work, and the other is suggesting electric propulsion. My suggestion is similar but not identical. I'd rather have a fueled, ducted fan than an electric propeller.
-
For those without a stumbleupon login:
-
Astronomers Discover Ring Around Asteroid
…but it turned out that Whackjob was just launching an asteroid back into space from Kerbin's surface!
Below: Artist's conception of the new ringed asteroid:
Hah! I love it. SOMEONE HAS TO DO THIS. Seriously.
-
Currently no, because the game isn't simulating multi-body physics. Your ship is only being gravitationally pulled by one planet/moon at a time (and then switched to "on rails" simple kepler orbits when you switch control away from that ship). In reality, the gravitation of multiple bodies is what creates the Lagrange effect.
Wicked Launch Mojo! (When logic fails)
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
I did something similar. So far I've only sent one manned mission there, but since my fuel was inadequate, I had to send a rescue ship to pick up my Kerbal. After docking, transferring as much fuel as possible, and taking my guy home, the ship entered Kerbin's SOI with about 1-2% fuel remaining. So even the rescue ship just narrowly made the return trip. I learning an important lesson about planning adequately.