Ippo

Well, so this morning's test didn't show me any obvious bug, so I uploaded the new build. Now for that Kerbal Social mod...

Well, I disagree because I disagree with your definition of user: the main "user" of this site is the modder, not the mod user, and it does a pretty good job at it. If you check the issues you will see that most of the feature requests are meant for the modder, not for the mod user.

Well, guess what...

Ok guys, I have updated it for 0.24.2. I am not releasing right now because it's almost 1 am, and the last two releases of DangIt have taught me that I should NEVER release something that I finished coding after midnight. In the next days I will try some more tests, but in the meantime, if you are interested the 1.1 branch is basically the next release already.

IMO the best option would be a bundler like the one that there was once for RSS + RO. For those that haven't used it, it was a custom made program that allowed the user to select what parts of Realism Overhaul to install, and then went and fetched each mod from its source and built the whole package together. Of course it had a lot of problems because of the way mods are distributed, but it did work like a charm. I think these kind of programs might fit both parties: each mod is fetched from its official source and therefore you don't have version problems, and the user doesn't have to manually follow the installation process. Maybe it has some drawbacks that I can't see right now?* * I am aware that it was hand built to deal with a lot of different download locations, packaging, and installation processes

Guess who's dumb... I *might* need to experiment with it a little more. Bear with me, I only tested it on a single rocket last night after midnight OT: RSS is awesome! I'm *almost* ready for my first manned orbital flight

Yes, thanks, I found it (I didn't see it before because I didn't have procedural fairings ^^). my engines stick to it but I can easily solve it with an additional decoupler, and now it's awesome

You should also look into KSP-AVC, not many mods support it right now, but those that do will notify you in-game when an update is available.

>procedural interstage wait, what and where? How did I miss that!? O.O

Honestly, no. I mean, in theory yes, but on the other hand, you can just strap moar boosters and lift that fuel anyway. This also holds for career mode, since a refueling station is basically just an interplanetary thing, and by the time you go interplanetary in career you have so much cash that saving money isn't really a necessity anymore so you can just add a bunch of SRBs and call it a day.

Hi everyone, as said in the title, I am using the full RSS + RO suite and I can't get any engine shroud on engines from either AIES or KW rocketry, while I get them with stock engines. I made absolutely sure not to install the no shroud config for KW (but that wouldn't explain why AIES doesn't have them too). Does anybody know what I'm doing wrong?

What if I ask politely?

On the other hand, throttle control: I might kill someone to have that.

Just wait until I add the force caused by the leaking resources...

Well, this is lovely news Thank you, you basically did all the work for me already

And no idea why, too! I'm on a forced hiatus (exams inbound <.< ), maybe I'll figure it out when I can get some time to work on it. It's very strange by the way, I really have no idea what that might be.

Take a look at the post above yours

Check out the Principia thread, it has some wicked orbit plots. Besides, it show that this performance bottleneck is not really significant (again, check out that thread: it's a pretty awesome read). Red Iron Crown: IIRC, KSP doesn't actually compute gravity between parts, and not even for single parts. IIRC, it only calculates the gravity in the CoM of the vessel and applies it to every part of the ship, and that's the reason why there is no torque due to gravity differentials in the game. I might be wrong though.

Just... WOW O.O EDIT: wait, is it just me, or that image is actually a link to a weird youtube video?

You are wrong: KSP is struggling to resolve contact forces between multiple bodies attached one to the other, which is objectively a hard task. The effects of gravity are instead a breeze, even in N body gravity. Basically, what happens right now is that only the gravity due to the main body is computed. Instead, you could compute the gravity vector for all the 7 main bodies in the system (sun + 6 planets)*, sum them together, and then proceed as usual. You don't need to include the gravity from other parts (it would be absurd) and you can safely neglect asteroids too. It is actually a very quick computation: if I have the time tonight, I'll code a proof of concept to show you. *EDIT: and also moons, but you could just put a distance threshold to avoid wasting time computing the effect of gilly on something that is orbiting jool

Nope, not true. In high school I once coded a very simple N-body system just for fun. It was 2D, but it was using 3D vectors anyway with the z component set to 0, and it could run smoothly with 100+ objects on screen. The real problem with N body gravity is that it is HARD, and that would be definitely way beyond a simple game's scope and in simulator's territory. But it's not a performance issue, with less than 20 bodies in the system you are definitely not going to cause performance issues, and even there you could just limit it to the 3 or 4 most influential bodies. EDIT: also, let's say that it does cause a performance issue. In that case, we could maybe accept to have fixed orbits for the celestial bodies and in that case the complexity goes from O(n^2) to O(n), which means it's basically free when you have so few elements to account for. It's true however that for the number of bodies we are speaking of, O(n^2) is still very cheap. If FAR doesn't cause performance problems, I don't see why N body gravity would. That being said, I'm not sure it would be a good addition to stock unless it can be turned off, because seriously, at that point the learning curve would be really steep, much more than with RSS. I'm still planning to use principia when it comes out though.

In fact, after studying and learning, I have found that a good TWR on the pad is closer to 1.2~1.3: with a low TWR, FAR, and some trial and error, you can actually fly a true gravity turn (which is pretty much impossible with a TWR > 2, or at least it is for me).

Actually I gave it a very very quick go (10 minutes tops) and found out that I really don't know where to change that. I tried with a simple MonoBehaviour that reset the throttle during Start(): the log told me it had run, but something else set the throttle to 50% *after* my plugin. It is surely a timing issue, but I didn't care enough to try and solve it.

A quote of mine is now in regex' signature. I have now obtained all that could be gained from this thread; I shall now leave this thread to enjoy my satisfaction.

Come on now, you know what everyone means with "simulator" and it's not that.