twich22

I was definitely time warping. I think I had just decoupled into my upper stage and then was time warping when I was teleported. The physicsless time warp saved my ship. It wasn’t until after I ended time warp that my ship exploded.

After spending more time playing patch 2 I have decided the game is now roughly equivalent to very early KSP 1. The game is playable but there are frequent game breaking bugs. Thus future updates should obviously focus on these game breaking bugs as well as optimization.

Found a new kraken today. I was magically teleported from orbit to the center of kerbin (See AP and PE). I ended up underwater. Now we know what the core of kerbin is made out of. Thats science.

Agreed. Patch 2 had some nice improvements but still need a lot more before the general public will be capable of playing the game.

Yes it seems that any nearby ship/object changes its trajectory to match that of the currently controlled vessel while in time warp.

Just wanted to say great work on patch two. I know there are a lot of negative posts out there but those are I believe a vocal minority. The performance optimizations are a huge step in the right direction, as are the other fixes. i suggest continuing in the same direction. I think performance and optimization still have a fair ways to go, including when a ship has multiple engines. This is a major bottleneck right now and will need to be fixed before the game can progress. Also other obvious optimizations. thanks for all your hard work!

The SAS function over corrects too hard. This causes a pendulum like wobble which is especially obvious on larger ships. It could also cause your ship to break apart if the wobble gets too strong. Also obviously bad for keeping your ship moving in your intended direction. To replicate, put a long, large ship into orbit with some SAS wheels on it. Spin the ship into a roll along its long axis, then turn on SAS. You will see that the SAS will spin the ship past it’s intended position, reverse course, and roll back in the opposite direction only to roll past its intended position again, reverse direction… on and on. Not sure how long this will go on for but I watched it happen for a good while and it didn’t seem to be slowing.

Im not sure this is something you can get rid of. It seems like they put it in the game for a reason but im not a modder so IDK for sure. Probably to do with the physics warp.

As title suggests, struts still break when attached in symmetry mode and then you use the undo key at any time. To repeat: Build a simple structure using some symmetry. Then, attach struts in symmetry. Then build something else. Then use the "undo" function. You will see that the struts are no longer actually connected to one another, except perhaps for the "primary" strut, but not the "symmetry" struts.

What are the settings. I believe the biggest optimizations occurred for 'Low' Settings. The major overhaul optimizations are coming in future patch.

MASSIVE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS!!!! Great work!!! The game is finally playable for me. Prior to this patch I couldnt even launch a stock plane because the game ran so slow. Now I can launch it and play at full speed no problem! Really great work in a short period of time!!!

Happy KapyDay. Glad to see spirits are still high and humor is fully functional. Can’t wait for the next cheese to drop. Anyone else concerned about the utility of those suit controls? Not sure the Kapys will be able to reach them. Can we please have someone look into this, don’t want any kapy hurt unnecessarily. Maybe test it on a kerbal first.

agree

That’s impressive. How did you keep the rocket from flexing

For what its worth, I have already launched craft over 1000 parts. I get less than 1 FPS, but Ive done it. Parts manager takes like 20 seconds to load.

I don’t think anyone is excusing anything. At least I am not. The game sucks right now. I think we’re all aware of that. It’s not what we have been envisioning or hoping for. It’s not even close to ksp1. So now we look to the future. We all want a better KSP. So the question is, will this game ever get there?

The game is clearly much more capable than KSP 1 ever was. When KSP 1 was at the stage KSP 2 is at now, which was a long long time ago, the size of ships you could build was much smaller. Most of that had to do with CPU power. From what I can tell, KSP 2 draws far less on CPU for much much larger craft. Once they fix whatever disaster is causing such an unnecessary draw on the GPU the game will be amazing.

58 engines for the first stage. I tried adding supports to stop the engines falling off when it loads onto the launch pad but they still fall off. I think it must be a bug related to mass or something strange. The ship is well secured but the engines still want to detach. I remember this bug from KSP 1 long ago. They fixed it eventually.

Thanks for posting this. When the game is optimized enough for me to be able to fly planes, this will come in handy.

Yea. Major bummer. Such a lovely station too. Have you tried turning on unbreakable joints and unbreakable parts, and going into time warp, and then undocking during time warp?

Good point. Docking and undocking ships with struts also broken.

I have also seen things that don’t make sense at all. For example, attaching a radial attachment point part to a metal bar to another radial attachment point, it is weaker than just having one radial attachment point attached to a metal bar.

Yup. Thanks for the addition. Figured this out on day 1 when I was trying to align all my landing gear relative to the ground and they were not all the same.

As title suggests, the strength of radially attached parts is not appropriate in many cases. Here is the best example of this: trying to attach 2 of the largest XL fuel tanks together side by side. If one tank is supported by the ground/clamp, and the other is free floating, the free floating one will immediately detach due to its own weight and weak attachment. However, if you use a different part to attach the two tanks together, depending on the particular part, it may or may not be strong enough to hold the tank suspended in the air. For example, if you use a docking clamp or radial attachment point and attach the tank that way, it is sometimes strong enough to hold the weight. If you use a girder and attach it that way, it is sometimes strong enough. An XL radial decoupler is far stronger and will hold the two tanks together fairly securely. However, one of the strongest attachments I have found is actually the “smallest” XL fuel tank, which is a conundrum as it should be no stronger than the largest XL fuel tank. However, you you attach the smallest XL fuel tank to the side of the largest XL fuel tank, and then add another of the largest XL fuel tanks to the attachment node of the smallest XL fuel tank, you will find that it holds the tanks together very securely. I am guessing this might have something to do with the weight of the attached part, however this does not really explain the behavior for using radial attachment nodes or docking clamps. Regardless, there should be some tiered system or simply a flat out consistent level for the strength of an attachment relative to other attachments. Similarly, there should be some comparison between a part that is radially attached and one that is nodaly attached.

It should be the other way around. When merging a vessel, the merged vessel is being added to the original. Thus, the original vessel name should be maintained for the workspace and vessel name. The way it is right now, after merging your vessel, you might autosave over the vessel you just merged or worse override a save for the vessel you just merged.