dave1904

thanks alot. Still managed to loose myself

I watch their content all the time. I like gamersnexus but he obviously cannot test all games and especially not ksp with 100 mods. I might be wrong but I do have the feeling single core performance will still be important for KSP2. If I could build 10000 part space stations in ksp I would. Same goes for KSP2. I will build craft until the fps tanks.

Carrie Fisher was bad actress.

Nothing needs to be upgraded on my pc. 10700k was a bad choice. 3080 is overkill for ksp. Its basically in sleep mode. Only reason I got it is because my 970 was a bottleneck and I got the 3080 rog strix a week after launch for retail price. It is great value for the money. I am leaving everything in my system the way it is. I doubt ddr5 memory is worth and can save alot by using my existing ram. Even if the 12900K is twice ad good as my 10700k it will always be the bottleneck. I'm also considering a 12600k. Way more for the money but I think they will be harder to get. By the looks of it no-one on forums has benchmarked adler Lake for ksp yet so I will make sure I'll get the data here as soon as I get it. Would love ddr5 but it's just to expensive. I doubt the chip shortage is going to end soon anyways so ddr4 it is.

You missed the point. I do not care what a benchmark score says. If it was not for KSP the 10700k would last for the next 10 years. Its a good CPU but when I got it 1 year ago I did not really believe the amd rumors and did not think we would be having a single core IPC war. Something that we gamers needed. I really only care about single core real world KSP performance. Your 5900x is a great CPU no doubt but I would pay more for a cpu with 4 cores with less userbenchmark scores and better KSP performance. The only reason I care about the 12900k is because of single core performance. KSP does not care if it has 4 cores or 20 and if KSP does not care neither do I Problem is I do not know how KSP deals with adler lakes architecture. It might actually end up being worse. I do not know enough about these things and the 2 core types in adler lake is making it even more complicated. If you want to know my score here it is. https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/47652692

Just ordered a 12900k and a DDR4 z690 motherboard. Since I doubt I will get it anytime soon I thought I can just cancel it if I am convinced otherwise. Anyway since its alot of money for an upgrade from a 10700k I was wondering if anyone has any benchmarks of how the 12th gen intel plays KSP compared to 8th gen intel upwards. Single core speeds are alot faster on paper but its KSP with 100 mods so it won't translate to real world. The upgrade to a 10700k from 4770k was great and looking at some benchmarks the 12900k could be a bigger leap but that might depend on limitations of the game. I have not idea but maybe you guys do I know its a waste of money but KSP is KSP and I am addicted.

Am I reading this wrong or did you formulate this wrong? Even after 1.12.0 this is still the case. I'm playing on 1.12.2 and MakingLessHistory still fixed the lethal terrain. Has makingless history always been a sollution to this problem? I cannot believe I only saw the fix to this problem today.........

Thanks. I was looking all over the web and could not find a single source that mentioned that able was hotstage. I was hotstaging the whole time and thought I was doing it wrong. I thought that the able could start once and obviously not restart without ullage after reading it somewhere yesterday. Maybe that person got the Agena and able stage mixed up. I have a second question about the thor able/delta. When I play 3.5 rescale is it cheating to set the fuel tank capacity to stock on the able/delta stages? I simply do not have the delta v to get into orbit even with the star srb. As mentioned I want to fulfill BDB satalite contracts with the real life launches because that forces me to learn about old rockets that I know nothing about.

I am flying alot of thor able and delta missions with engine ignitor. I disabled ullage simulation in the aj 10 (bluedog_Able_Engine) config because the tank is pressurized if I am not mistaken. I am just wondering if I am correct about this. I do not want to add ullage motors or rcs trusters if the real thing did not have it and cannot find staging details of the real rocket.

Eggs and Bacon after the HMS Agamemnon.

Don't expect modern games to run good on 10 year old hardware by the time KSP is released. That goes for the pc playerbase that think KSP2 should run on a duo core laptop with 1gb of ram too. It would be best for everyone if the last gen versions were scrapped and the game be made for current gen.

I didn't even read the disclaimer on the loan on my house that I signed last week. As long as they don't notice that I got a 3080 with some of it im ok

The magic wand wish for KSP 1 and the feature I cannot wait for in KSP2 are the same. Axial Tilt.

We have seen the UI of KSP2 and fundamentally its the same as KSP1. It would be very stupid to change the controls on PC because it works and is half the reason the game is famous. The console version will sell enough to pay for itself so it is actually very important for them to spend time on a console specific UI and control scheme. They should do it like ubisoft did with GRAW 1 and 2. Totally different games on both systems.

Not really. Even people that know how far galaxys are from eachother cannot really comprehend the distance.

Without kopernicus I would have been done with KSP years ago and I honestly suspect alot of other players. There is only so much you can do with the stock solar system but Kopernicus makes it infinite.

I really hope KSP2 allows you to mod planets in a far simpler way. Kopernicus seems to be the most annoying mod to work on there is.

Oh nice but also a bit sad. The old parts must have been loads of work too.

I don't understand the apollo update fully. We do have the majority of new parts in the current release or not? Sorry my memory is awful. I can't remember what parts looked like years back

This is the simplest(best) explanation I've ever seen. I've always wanted to know the maths on when thrust is more important than deltav. Example would be twr of 2. 0 on the mun with 3000m/s or twr of 10 with 2500m/s. I am sure the 3000m/s one from my gut feeling but my example was extreme. I often wonder at what point should I use a larger heavier engine.

nvm

The simple adjustable fairing is not covering the payload and is causing drag. I fixed it by moving the modulecargobay to be below modulesimpleajustable fairing. It was this MODULE { name = ModuleCargoBay DeployModuleIndex = 1 closedPosition = 0 lookupRadius = 3.25 } MODULE { name = ModuleSimpleAdjustableFairing segmentLength = 5.1796 numSlices = 2 deploySpeed = 25 shieldingCenter = 0, 3.4505, 0 shieldingBaseRadius = 4.5465 editorOpenOffset = 12.5, 0, 0 WALL { transformName = Wall mass = 0.5 CoM = 1.25, 2.77, 0 rootOffset = 0, -0.443, 0 } CONE { transformName = Cone mass = 0.5 CoM = 1.74, 5.23, 0 rootOffset = 0, -0.443, 0 } } I changed it to this and it works. Why it makes a difference I do not know. MODULE { name = ModuleSimpleAdjustableFairing segmentLength = 5.1796 numSlices = 2 deploySpeed = 25 shieldingCenter = 0, 3.4505, 0 shieldingBaseRadius = 4.5465 editorOpenOffset = 12.5, 0, 0 WALL { transformName = Wall mass = 0.5 CoM = 1.25, 2.77, 0 rootOffset = 0, -0.443, 0 } CONE { transformName = Cone mass = 0.5 CoM = 1.74, 5.23, 0 rootOffset = 0, -0.443, 0 } } MODULE { name = ModuleCargoBay DeployModuleIndex = 1 closedPosition = 0 lookupRadius = 3.25 }

I compared the config to the other SAF parts in BDB and simply made the change of putting the module ModuleSimpleAdjustableFairing before ModuleB9PartSwitch(Texture) and its working now. No Idea why but maybe it might save you a couple of secs. the working config is below. I have no idea what I am doing but it seems to work.

The Titan IIIE simple adjustable fairing is not shielding the payload. I noticed it because the rocket loved to flip over since the payload is causing tons of drag. I've tested all the other 2m+ SAF adapters on the same payload and they are working properly. Last image shows the payload has drag.

I love them. I really hope wing design has a major impact on aerodynamic performance. I would also love better UIs on how drag and lift etc is displayed.