Kobymaru

Okay, that makes sense! As always the case with adaptors: that's purely aesthetical That's a bug, not a feature! That shouldn't be there. I sure hope so! Since the ship will be somewhat linear, and the docking ports are notoriously "bendy", I'm afraid the ship will feel less like a ship and more like a cooked noodle. Now that is a good idea. I should have thought of that "Some assembly required"-Style To be honest, I simply did not take part count into account when designing the mission. With my old PC, I had lags with a smaller (~400 parts) mission but after getting my new rig it ran amazingly smooth and I thought all my performance problems were solved. Turns out part count is just another parameter I have to consider when designing things.

This mod sounds awesome! Lol, and how many FPS did you have? Ok, this sounds really interesting. That's 0-Change "fix". I assume it will feel inherently sluggish, but at least I won't get eye-cancer from all the single frames, and hopefull the input will still work. It's because writing multithreaded applications is hard, multithreaded physics calculations harder and debugging multithreaded applications using multithreaded physics calculations is the hardest. Remember that you not only have to calculate stuff, but you also have to divide the task into "work packages" for the single threads, sync up the results when they are done, get the timing right, etc... It makes stuff a lot more complicated. If I assume correctly, Unity 5 will bring multithreaded calculations. But that would require switching the game over to Unity 5 - which quite frankly, I don't see happening anytime before the big 1.0 (or any time after that, for that matter) [edit] Ok, I stand corrected. Several threads have mentioned that Squad does look at upgrading to Unity 5. No, it's a real 64 bit executable. The thing is: 64-Bit processes are not magically faster. Here's the difference: - The pointer and integer sizes are twice as big (this actually makes the memory usage larger) - The process can assume that the CPU is newer and has more features. This brings some performance gain, but not much. - With the increased pointer sizes, more than 4 GB of memory can *theoretically* be adressed. I'm not sure if The Game/Unity is actually capable of using that, because I haven't seen a KSP process that's over 3 GB yet (even 64 bit).

Sorry, I forgot to mention that. I tried the 64 bit version too. FPS were the same. Did you try it? What were your results?

I see, that seems like a "good" option. I understand what you're getting it. But to me it seems just so strange to cut down on luxury just to accomodate the game engine. Compromises due to mass limitations? TWR? Stability? Costs? Practicability? All fine and well, because those factors are "real". But not because the game can't handle my awesomeness. I'm gonna go through with it anyway. If I am doomed to fail, then I shall fail. It's the Kerbal way! But out of curiosity, why do you think I am doomed? Probably not, but it's nice to see that someone shares my pain How did you cope with 1600 parts?

Hi! So I am currently preparing a mission to Eloo. This is the only body I haven't visited yet, so I wanted to make a big mission this time. I have landers, probes, rovers, a base, an orbital station, a refueling craft, tugboats and pretty much everything I could conceive of. I have been assembling it slowly in Orbit and strutting it all together with Kerbal Attachment System Strut End Points. I'm like 80% done and here's a snapshot of what it looks like at the moment: http://i.imgur.com/4ekoM8P.jpg There's just a "tiny" problem: I'm not even finished, and it turns out that I already have over 1000 parts!!! As you can imagine, the performance is awful. I get 5 FPS tops. And that's with a new PC! I have 8 GB of RAM and an Intel i5 4690K. That should be enough right? Well, it's not. The thing is: Once I get this monster into Eloo orbit, the problem is solved. It will disassemble and I will put the crafts into different places/orbits, so I expect a final part count of around 500. The problem is that I have yet some more assembling to do and then all the maneuvers to get there. That won't be fun with 5 FPS. My question is: does anyone have ideas about what I could do to get some more performance? Here's what I'm willing to do: - Go down with graphics up to potato quality - Tweak or mod the game - Change some obscure hidden settings Here's what I'm NOT willing to do: - Reduce part count. That's a big mission with a big ship, and a lot of equipment. I won't scale down. - Use welding mods. Most of my parts are functional. This is a composite "mothership" vessel with functional equipment, and not a single piece of iron. Here's what I already tried: - Change resolution, full screen and the likes. - Go down with graphics quality. Almost no effect. - Increase or decrease Phyics-Delta T - Use the 64 Bit version I am currently pondering to buy a new graphics card, but seeing that neither the GPU usage nor the GPU memory are used completely, I'm affraid the Graphics card is not the bottleneck.

Me neither actually. I tried this a few times, but the large explosion happened only once. Could not reproduce it since. The rest of the behaviour works everytime though.

Incidentally a cluster bomb is exactly what I was trying to build. But this is so much cooler! Excatly. Only I don't need 26 Dimensions. 4-5 should be enough.

They "don't" detach. I think it has something to do with the fact that that some connections are infinitely strong but move apart physically under tension (like an infinitely strong spring). My theory is that the enormous acceleration forces excite some of the "springs" the springs spring back but in turn shortly accelerate the craft (and centerof mass) which then excites other springs. That would account for rotation and the cloudy-ness, but not for the reduced gravity and acceleration (of the overall craft).

Hi. Ever wondered how you could bring your favorite Quantum-Mechanical phenomenon to KSP? You can now, with the Delocalized Quantum Sepatron Cloud!! Step 1 Build The core. We need only two cubic orthogonal struts Step 2 Add Quantum Particles. A slight tilt helps (so that the Quantum angular momentum of our system is non-zero) Step 3 Reduce Amount of Solid fuel in Quantum Particles (so that the time derivative of the Quantum spatial momentum of our system is high enough) Step 4 Duplicate Quantum Particles Step 5 Launch, somewhat away from KSC for safety. Don't forget to check your quantum staging! Step 6 Enjoy Quantum Hilariousness. The Quantum System is now delocalized! Instead of having a fixed position and size, the System is now a cloud with a higher probability density at the center, and a lower one at the edges. Also, it exists in two states at once! The System is now a linear combination of the state "Respects KSP Physics" and "Ignores KSP Physics", which results in interesting Quantum Phenomena such as: - Cloud direction change - Non-Linear Quantum Angular momentum Changes - Much smaller gravitational pull of Kerbin (see how we unified Quantum Mechanics and Gravity here? Now that wasn't so hard, was it, Mr Einstein?) - Cloud actually Accelerates into a direction So who said Quantum Physics isn't fun? You? Why don't you go stand over there, behind the R&D Center, my friend?

Hi! I am encountering a bug more and more often. It looks like this: I am permanently stuck in this view. I cannot enter any buildings or move around. I can click all of the UI elements though. If I leave this savegame, one of 3 things can happen: - I can open the save again, and everything is back to normal view - I can open the save again and I get the exact same error - Every menu item in the "main menu" is dark and I cannot click it. I have to restart I have to open/close the save or the game multiple times until I can play normally. Does anybody know what to do against it? I am on Windows 32 Bit My Mods: - Toolbar - USI Tools - ActionGroupManager - Kerbal Attachment System - MechJeb2 - Docking Port Alignment - RCS Build Aid - SelectRoot - TAC Fuel Balancer - TAC Life Support - Kerbal Alarm Clock - Universal Storage

I Agree TBH, I have seen this only once when having FAR installed. When it wasn't, I always got the stretchy-connections thing even when going far above the 15g mark. Nope! Turns out, parts are held together either with an invisible, super strong glue or simply MAGIC. http://i.imgur.com/lA3k5C1.png http://i.imgur.com/mNg2hlJ.png How could one go to test that? Also, does anyone have a nice Idea for a proper shearing test? From the torsion testing, I found out that there is a shear-breaking point with the launch stability enhancers attachment, so how could I properly test shearing?

Hi! I recently put my ship under rather large forces accidentally, and I found that it was quite stable. More stable than I'd like it to be, actually. So I set out to test some types of stresses. Since I'm neither a physicist, nor a materials-study-guy, I probably misnamed them. In that case, please ignore the names and just look at the pictures. Here is the first, I call it "tension". It's simply a large pull along the stack axis. Here are the pictures: The setup: http://i.imgur.com/xNwq0cT.png The hinge: http://i.imgur.com/f7DBrHy.png The result: http://i.imgur.com/LFjP2W5.png I would expect the connection to simply disconnect. But it seems that there is no such thing as "tearing" due to tension forces. All joints behave somewhat like a spring. Here is something that I call "shearing". It's a pull perpendicular to the stack axis. I would expect the connection to fail. The setup: http://i.imgur.com/7agjKg8.png The hinge: http://i.imgur.com/CA2A7jG.png The result: http://i.imgur.com/BpYzOy2.png But no! It seems infinitely strong. Instead, we got us a nice little pendulum. Well, at least the connection exerts some torque to get back into the original position. Here is the only one that actually worked, I call it "torsion". The setup: http://i.imgur.com/uB4VJnb.png The hinge: http://i.imgur.com/VKuw4RS.png The result: http://i.imgur.com/PY4dB0k.png This works with most parts, but not with all. There was no tearing with the "Modular Girder Segment", this simply behaved like a "wire" that could be wound up indefinitely. Do you have other types of stresses that some parts seem to withstand infinitely? If so, please post your results here. So, what do you guys think? Will this ever be fixed? Does Squad care about stuff like this? If they do fix it, will it open a huge can of bugs?

Here is an Idea, unfortunately I have no Idea how to implement it: - Make the processing rate a tweakable, like engine thrust. This way, people can adjust the rates to each other to create an optimal ressource flow/electricity usage. By the way, is the code for the plugins uploaded somewhere, like github?

After the update, it started working. Probably it's because I still had RessourceConverter or USI Tools installed. That's great, finally I can do Life Support stuff Thanks for your TAC parts! (And all the other US parts too, of course )

About your first lander: I feel your pain. About your current lander: as mentioned by others, the TWR is way too low. Happened to me too You have to take into account that the atmosphere reduces engine thrust A LOT, especially for non-aerospike engines. Just look at how sad he is

It works for me, so the site is not down in principle. I suggest simply trying it again, then clearing your DNS cache and trying again (Windows command prompt as administrator: "ipconfig /flushdns"). If that doesn't work you could switch your DNS server temporarily to another one, like this: 8.8.8.8 or 8.8.4.4 (Google) If I switch to Tracking station and let it run for a while at 1000x time warp (which is NOT the highest), then: - Electric Charge is depleted - Carbon Dioxide/Waste Water are at the same level as before (if TAC-LS is OFF) or full (if TAC-LS is ON). That means that the converters are simply not working on rails.

If the vessel is active and I do timewarp, everything is fine. The problem is when going to the Tracking Station and timewarping there, then returning to the vessel.

Wow, thanks a lot! That was really fast. Sabatier now works as expected. Unfortunately, I have the next question (although it might be more related to TAC than US). So what's the deal with Electrity and time warp? I have a ship that produces enough electricity to run all Water purifiers/sabatiers/elctrolyzers as needed, so the battery never goes down. When I switch away from it, time Warp a certain period and then switch back, all the Electricy is gone. That would be perfectly fine, but in the meantime, all the converters have stopped and I am facing a full Carbon Dioxide/Waste Water tank. So what's up that? Did I misconfigure something? How can I get them to run while the craft is not selected?

Hi guys! I have a little problem: With the default ressource consumption, Kerbals produce 31 Units of CO2 per day/kerbal. (Corresponds to 0.00148012889876 in the settings). This seems a little much to me, but I don't really know anything, especially not the conversion factors. The Spreadsheet that's available mentions something like "0.067 L/Kerbin-day (liquid)" . How does this relate to the "Units" of CO2 in the game? Could there be a bug?

Well, now I have 4 sabatiers for 2 kerbals, and it still isnt enough :/ I definitely have enough of both. Ok, so now I checked the numbers. The US-Sabatier reactor consumes 3,48 U/day CO2. That wold be fine, but: Kerbals are supposed to produce 0.067 L/Kerbin-day (liquid) of CO2, according to the spreadsheet. Kerbals actually produce a lot more. According to the TAC-LS build aid, a CO2 tank for 287,74 U of CO2 is enough to be filled by 3 kerbals in 3 days. This would amount to 31 U/day/Kerbal! I checked that experimentally and it checks out. Now I don't know conversion factors of L (Liquid) to U, but it seems to me there is a bug somewhere between the two mods. Unfortunately I can not tell which mod it is, because I lack the ressources-overview, but I hope this info helps the great Daishi and the great Paul Kingtiger figure stuff out.

Hi, I finally got my interplanetary mission on the way and I got to test the Life-Support gear. I have three Kerbals in the Ship, and when I activate the Sabatier reactor, the Carbon Dioxide is not going down. I couldn't even tell if it's going significantly less up. How many Sabatier's would it take to clean all of the CO2 that's produced? Is it actually the purpose of the Sabatier to get rid of CO2 or is it mainly to get rid of the H2 coming from the electrolyzer?

Hi! I consider myself a "seasoned" KSP player, so with the upcome of the .25 update I was looking ahead to a more challenging gameplay. So I started a new career with "Hard" difficulty setting (Science Rewards -> 60%, Funds Rewards -> 60%). Since I recalled from my restart in .24 that Funds are not limiting, but Science is, I adopted the "Outsourced R&D" Strategy with 10% commitment which turns Funds income into Science: And boy, was I right! I had zero problems with funds but the Science points just kept flowing. Especially since even the Part-Testing contracts now gave huge amounts of Science points too. I used to think this was a good thing, until I came unto this little juicy contract: I'm sure KR-2L engines are the height of Kerbal Engineering and I understand that Kerbodyne would pay good moneys to see their gear up in space, but damned if almost half a million funds and 1600 Science points don't break the game! As you can probably see, this contract brings more funds into my program than I currently have! And with 1600 Science points I can unlock half of the tech tree. And this is the "Hard" setting, mind you. So I wanted to ask: is KSP economics too easy? What could be done to make it more challenging? Here are a few suggestions of my own: - Simply pay less money on contracts! Bringing that engine up to Orbit is really not that hard. It should not pay half a million Kerbs (Like "Bucks" but not). - Change the Funds->Science exchange rate drastically And here's what I think would be really great: Riskier Contracts! - Deadlines should be less generous, since one can do an almost infinite number of launches in that time - There should be other ways of failure other than deadline expiration. For example: * For part testing: you get a !!limited!! amount of that part (like 3-5, or only one in high tech cases like the KR-2L) and if you crash them all without fulfilling the contract, it is considered failed. * For "planting a flag...", you get also a limited amount of flags that you can put on ships and if you run out, you failed - Obviously, there need to be more contract types (not just "Explore", "Put Flag" and "Test Part"). If there are other types like "Bring satellite into orbit" or "Bring this Kerbal to that place" there could be other risks involved What do you guys think?

Hey guys, do you plan to restore the Decoupler functionality anytime soon? The decoupler looks great and I'd love to use it, but for now it's just cosmetic.

Noooo! You have to stay with this mod and maintain it FOREVER and EVER and EVER! In all seriousness, great work guys! I hope that even after your mod is feature complete, you could at least update it for newer KSP/TAC/KAS versions and fix surfacing bugs.

Did you just "rip them out"? How much force do you need for that?