Psycho_zs

Hi! In KSP1 some realism enhancements can be achieved with a relatively simple MM patch, because those mechanics are already in the game, but not used in stock (i.e. engine spool up time, throttle depth limits). Are there any realism mechanics that you wanted to put into KSP2, but couldn't because of the gameplay balance? Any of those that you or somebody else sneaked in for config tinkerers to find? What are the limits of stock realism options and will there be something extra under the hood, in a space between stock and full blown mods?

Yes! [procedural] pylons, connectors, beams, trusses, stack/surface adapters...

2022-01-21

Features like holding orbital directions, speed vecrors, targets can be compressed into much earlier portion of tech progression of probe cores. Further down the line probe cores could gain a bit more sophisticated unlockable features, such as: a regime for killing horizontal velocity by adjusting pitch/yaw, cases: final stages of powered descent a regime for killing vertical velocity by adjusting elevation (pic 2), cases: suborbital to orbital transition, dragging apoapsis along by pitcing up, or limiting it's altitude by pitching down keeping altitude during earlier of middle portions of powered descent from orbit adjustable constant elevation (pic 3), cases: atmospheric flight orbital insertion docking port alignment adjustables for existing hold modes (pic 1) fine-tune attitude without disengaging hold autocompensation of CoM/CoT misalignment by trimming engine gimbals and adjusting ship control vector Mockup usig KSP1 GUI: Mouse or keyboard controls for trim could be used to adjust.

Hi! Got a new laptop with AMD Graphics and terrain shaders are missing. Tested on a fresh game, setting terrain quality to high. Graphics stack seems to be capable as, for example, Scatterer ocean shaders do work. Am I missing something? OS: Linux 5.10 Debian GNU/Linux 64bit CPU: AMD Ryzen 3 5300U with Radeon Graphics (8) RAM: 17884 GPU: AMD RENOIR (DRM 3.40.0, 5.10.0-8-amd64, LLVM 12.0.1) (1913MB) SM: 50 (OpenGL 4.6 (Core Profile) Mesa 21.2.1) RT Formats: ARGB32, Depth, ARGBHalf, Shadowmap, RGB565, ARGB4444, ARGB1555, Default, ARGB2101010, DefaultHDR, ARGB64, ARGBFloat, RGFloat, RGHalf, RFloat, RHalf, R8, ARGBInt, RGInt, RInt, BGRA32, RGB111110Float, RG32, RGBAUShort, RG16, BGRA10101010_XR, BGR101010_XR, R16 Player.log: https://pastebin.com/5zh5eyjK Glxinfo: https://pastebin.com/ZvkE2u0Y

Blacklist feature of ReStock to the rescue!

I noticed a couple of visual issues with multiple engines: plume animations run in unison and overlaying plumes become way too bright. It might be a good idea to randomize animation starting point. As for overlaying plumes, I don't know, is it possible to make plumes more transparent when there are a bunch of them close together?

Wow. This is a game changer! Looks like hypercharging RealPlume with "@energy /= 5, @speed *= 5" patch is going to become a half-remembered dream. I wonder if it would be at all viable to autocalculate at least some parameters of the plume from engine's Isp and thrust? Like if one had a baseline template for a kerolox plume, applying it to different engines would require only specifying nozzle mouth coordinates/diameter.

Awesome! One thing that bugs me a bit about RealPlume is that exhaust animation is rather slow. IRL hypersonic flames are super fast even in slow-mo playback. So realistic effect might be achieved if flame particles are stretched and blurred (statically) a bit along the direction of motion while moving super fast (almost indistinguishable between really moving or just being randomly sprinkled over plume area each frame).

Congrats with The Milestone! Right of the bat, my favorite killer features: depth masks and hemispherical tanks

How about a hybrid system for career mode? Design a part (semi-)procedurally and commit it to production for some cost (analogous to tech tree initial purchases). Redesigning a part would also cost some money, etc. So it would mostly be the same lego build process, but one could pre-customize some of the pieces for money and science points.

Orbital Assembly Facility/Dock/Something

If you think about it, thrust in timewarp and orbiting a binary system are technically similar in that both are a replacement of conic formula in trajectory calculation.

Holy [bunch of words prohibited on this forum]!!! So may good yeses!

Two questions with related subquestions about craft construction: 1. In short: will noodly rockets make into the final product. Long: How similar the physical behavior of rockets will be to KSP 1? Is it conceptually the same, or is there some plan to make them stiffer but more brittle? Judging by pre-alpha footage they are still pretty wobbly and can be bent pretty far before breaking. Breakage, dynamic pressure limits? Too much sidewind destroys tanks (feature from FAR)? 2. Is craft structure still strictly a tree? How about multipath/loops? Are stack decouplers still a thing (I mean they are backwards, thrust plates/interstages are conceptually much closer to reality)? And yet another one: what about less crazy near future tech? Fission-powered electric propulsion: Reactors + Hall thrusters, MPDs, PITs? (BTW, if I was in charge of making a new KSP, one of the first things I would do is to try and get @Nertea on the team )

Orion Drive RCS system... I can't breathe...

I think the second variant is for you, it specifically mentions breakages.

YAY! A flame war! ) YAML rules. That's all there is to say on the matter.

https://youtu.be/ftLT_puDtxo Translation here:

Life support is already confirmed as a feature, most likely already as a difficulty option. So this section of the poll is about specifics.

Consider it a single long list with multiple choices (forum limits to 3 questions with 20 variants per question). I hope I didn't forget anything important....

Sadly, no realistic exhaust plumes... yet.

Considering support of thrusted timewarp, this would be a great scenario.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/features/interviews/an-in-depth-conversation-with-the-creator-of-ksp2/ Well, they will have engines similar to the Epstein drive because of their torch-ship qualities But they mention Orion and ICF engines among those. So the similarity is rather stretchy.