shdwlrd

And much larger texture files. Most all of the texture files are multiple layer, high fidelity images. Textures like that can slow down GPU performance. (Think how Crysis makes even today's high end PCs cry for mercy when on ultra high settings.)

Do you have visual mods or restock installed? I can see those impacting the performance.

The only reason I'm suggesting that is the low graphics settings is the pre-updates graphics for KSP. I've never seen frame rates that low until I've reached about 800-1000 parts with any of my Intel machines. I've played KSP on I-7 3rd, 4th, and 6th gen laptop processors. The only time I had frame rates that low was the game was using the integrated Intel GPU for some reason. PS, the last time I've really played KSP was 1.7.1, I haven't built anything that large since the newer updates dropped.

Easy enough to check if it's your GPU, change you graphics settings to low. If your frame rate goes up, it's probably your GPU. If it's doesn't, there's something else going on.

I wouldn't make that assumption.

Probably to alleviate the concerns that the most up to date assets won't be available in the game.

The foundation for LS should be in the game. If the dev's want to expand on it, cool, as long as you can disable it. But there needs to be some consistency with it as mentioned above.

I agree, I'm just stating the possibility. With a couple games up for release, it could be one of those. It's always a gambit with these cons.

Sure, https://ir.take2games.com/news-releases/news-release-details/private-division-announces-new-seattle-area-development-studio?field_nir_news_date_value[min]= https://ir.take2games.com/news-releases/news-release-details/take-two-interactive-software-inc-reports-results-fiscal-third-0?field_nir_news_date_value[min]=

I'm just reporting what I've seen on private divisions website, and what was in TTI's quarterly earnings report.

Most of the Mk1/Size 1 parts have a max temp of 1400-2000. I was thinking of matching the Mk1 fuselage parts and making them 1800. If you seen my GitHub suggestion, I explain my though process there. Man that's an old design. Haven't seen those parts in forever.

Something was going on within star theory, they aren't listed with private division anymore. Private division created a new studio, so who knows. I'm thinking it was some inter-company issues. Things like that usually don't make into the public eye unless someone is livid enough not to care about a NDA or working conditions are that bad. I doubt that's the case. KSP2 has been in production for seemingly before the poodle engine was revamped. If the physics engine was that problematic, they would of shut the project down or replaced it with a 3rd part suite by now. If KSP2 is going to be featured at PAX east, I'm hoping what they have a playable demo to prove that the physics is as solid as we hope. They are probably moving on with the planned info release schedule. The topic of the next-gen tech video does fall inline with the previous videos last year.

almost spot on for the Mk1 parts, the max temps are a little high.

Personally I don't think jump ramps are necessary for the runways, but at least we know now that runways and ramps are going to apart of the colonies.

The square buildings look to be hangars of some type, the cylinders are a cluster of triangle shaped containers.

A couple good reasons for a delay and radio silence.

I'm more than happy to add comments and suggestions to github. Beyond that, I have no idea how to use it.

I vaguely remember the fuselage parts from the old days of KSP when I started using mods. I wanted to try them, but they were swallowed up by the forum and I wasn't able to find them again. I guess better late than never right? Ooo… spherical tanks that aren't associated with USI, now I have to start playing with those. PS. After looking at the configs, you may want to raise the crash tolerance and decrease the max temp to bring them more inline with the stock parts.

I was wondering when this mod would come back around, thanks LGG for bringing it back.

Huh, ok. You would know better than I would. Now I'm curious what that mod was. I'll have to dig it up later.

It makes sense limit ground to orbit or vice versa transfers to the current SOI. (If you really need something somewhere not within your current SOI ASAP, you're going to do that mission yourself.) For station to station transfers the number of ships would depend on how much funds/resources do you want to spend on just to ferrying stuff around. For this to work, it will have to cost you something; whether it's funds, resources, or both. As an example, paying 90-95% of what you produce in fuel just to run a large transport fleet is a waste of time. It would force the player to choose the appropriate number of ships to dedicate to ferrying resources and Kerbals around.

I may be wrong, but wasn't Kerbal Space Transport System a parts pack that helped you land rovers and provided large cages to help launch components?

It would be necessary to have some automation for the late game resource transfers. They way I see it you would have to build or place specific parts on your ground/orbital colonies to use a connection point to automate the resource distribution network. For ground based colonies, a landing pad or hangar/garage. For orbital colonies a dedicated docking port, or hangar. Once included in the network, you can see the resources flowing in. The different options could include building your own crafts, setting the rules how the resources are transferred (time intervals, how the resources are routed, etc.), have transfers happen completely automagically, paying resource/funds/time costs for transportation of resources by private contractors, whether or not to have random hiccups. (Just spitballing options, I’m not really thinking about the details here.)

This is what I would like to see for the macro scale automation. It would avoid the whole Kerbal milkrun program situation.

sometime after today