Nuke

yea i think so. i built a 5-cluster with the micro cubes and struts, kind of built as a tree with 3 of them around the core. those fell apart a lot or were kraken food. also the small structural panels have the same effect. i was wondering if the colliders on the ion model were bigger than the cubes and would cause them to nudge each other while under part simulation. or perhaps their strength values in their structural config needs to be raised. structure parts should be the strongest parts in game for their respective sizes (stronger than equivalent tankage). bigger cubes would be too big, i ended up using an engine plate and stuck 8 of them on it with the reactor in the middle, that actually worked well.

ideally they would use the same part module, you could toggle rcs, engine, both, external (action groups, scripting, kal-1k, or something else). obviously this would not work for thruster quads so they would either have that not an option or it would just use the rear facing engines (which could be useful for changing frontness, or virtual gimbals).

i think some of the kerbals are using chewing gum to attach parts. and i totally expect kerbals to do that.

there are lots of numbers in the game which i wish had more decimal places.

all those truss segments and struts seem to be like kraken treats. sort of like when you shake cat treats and they all come running, except its the kraken.

was playing with ion ships today and i have to say, the new physics warp is awesome. this needs to be spot on for interstellar flights and i think it passes muster. still need a way to plot constant thrust trajectories, but with the basic ion drives i think this is adequate for the current state of the game.

after running an ion craft to jool, ive decided that single rocket missions are pretty much ok and playable. but try to do a multi-launch mission and you will have problems. what you can do is limited by what you can cram into a single launch. with rockets being wobbly, good luck with that. also i really like the physics warp. makes those long ion burns much less of a waste of time. though i think the game needs a way to plot constant burn trajectories for those.

i really dont get the point, it just makes saving more complicated.

you sure about that. i got that intel from scott manly's videos. sure as hell dont want the gpu doing space math.

it does set a precedent. how much they get done and what state the game is in post-patch will send a very good message about how things will be going forward.

thats the trend, put everything in an app container that they control, so you cant block ads and malware. i really dont mind that they are tight lipped, they likely need all hands on deck for the inevitable point release. but discord, discord can go try and land on the sun.

are they going to be one of those devs that only uses discord. gross. i dont want that on my system. its a gaping security hole, and they require their users be members of the cult of the smartphone.

sdl is pretty good, ive used it, granted only version 1.2. also i retract what i said, dispite being able to bind the controls, they did nothing in game. i believe this might be a stub feature.

i think it may have something to do with how i was mounting them. attached one to the like diameter xenon tank and it stayed on. before that i was attaching them in arrays using the structural plates and girders, i think this may be an issue with the structural parts (they should be more... structural). im also gonna try rebuilding the ship from scratch. i just didnt have time when i posted the bug. its funny having 20 ion engines just fall off.

sounds like they hired 3rd party promoters. i cant say its a bad thing to outsource this kind of stuff. yes its expensive, but so is game dev. you have to consider how much it cost in relation to if they did it in house, and if they did it in house, that would take artists off of actual development. games are a business.

id do it just for consistency because all the other engines use actual chemicals rather than an ambiguous name like "liquid fuel". i generally like this move because it takes the guess work out when it comes to modding other engines, and will help declutter mod contributed resources. does that work as a monopropellant, because i can only find references to its use as part of a hypergolic bi-propellent (the wikipedia article kind of sucks).

lets see, tried to land on minms... nope, fuel missing. tried again to land on minmus... worked but i got stuck and my ship fell through the planet. tried to launch a big nuclear rocket... too floppy. tried to build a big nuclear rocket in orbit... docking very buggy. kraken kept eating things. tried to build an ion cruiser... ion engines kept falling off before i could launch. you know what the problem is? gpus are really good at fp32 but terrible at fp64 unless you have a workstation card. so you just cant use doubles and the math gets questionable as a result. i had this problem when playing around with photogrammetry, id get good results on the cpu, but when i tried to offload to gpu, the math got glitchy and the results weren't as good.

i have confirmed gamepad support. its sad because this game benefits from more robust controls of a hotas. i dont have a gamepad but my analog keyboard can emulate one. hotas might work if it supports an xinput mode. otherwise you could use an xinput wrapper. something like ucr should work.

are the kerbals using chewing gum as a fastener?

also had my ship explode on vessel switch. that was fun. i think docking was on the known broken list.

ksp2 is very gpu bound since all the part physics is done on compute. and if you dont have that compute you are going to have a bad time. 2.0 slot is mostly going to be a bottleneck to load times, but it should be enough to handle physics. its still a bottleneck and should be upgraded asap. as far as cpu goes the game can run on as few as 4 cores. but if you just want to play ksp2 at the minimal cost, id do the gpu upgrade. id do both if you can swing it. even moving up to something a few generations old would be an improvement.

a week seems fair. a month would make more sense if the game was more stable. longer patch cycles can get more done as they spend less time rolling out new versions, and more time fixing bugs. but in its current state, if they could fix the top 5-10 worst bugs the first week, that would be a very good start.

because if they do not reinvest those funds into the game, and sit on their duff for a year or two while leaving the game a broken mess, it will ruin the company's reputation. and yes some game companies can pull some pretty shadey things, ive seen it several times. there are usually consequences to that kind of thing. but it is too early into the lifecycle of this game to make that judgement. there are however some things to look out for. if the patch cycle is infrequent and frequently disappointing. if the developers stop communicating with their community. if they are making big changes that don't work out. if they axe too many planned major features in favor of getting what works done (say dropping multiplayer or interstellar flight). its been what, 3 days now, they are probibly still trying to sort out the feedback. that is a good question, and a question that would be fool hardy to answer now. early access is, a gamble, yes, and frankly a small one compared to most that life throws at you. but until pd has done something to indicate that the whole thing was a scam, it is wrong to assume that is the case. delays can be forgiven, especially in lieu of a certain plague which will not be named.

it was released as early access. this was clearly disclosed that the game was to be released in an incomplete state. the funds earned will likely be re-invested into the game to get it ready for prime time. now having just released id give them the benefit of the doubt while eagerly awaiting the first round of bugfixes. i know other devs use this kind of thing as an excuse to drag their heels for the better part of a decade and never really make any progress. private division i don't think has a reputation for doing that, and i hope they don't end up falling into that trap. what you see is typical of early access games and should not be seen as a sign of doom and gloom for the future.

confirmed. ive seen this. specifically when using surface mounted engines.