JoeSchmuckatelli

Presuming that you are dealing both with the normal gravity of Earth and the centrifugal force of the rotating habit - setting the floor at some angle between 0 and 90 should do it. You enter at the hub, and then with some creative design work, you can go from walking to stairs to ladders that get you to the work stations. Heck - you might want two or more 'floors' with different 'g' for acclimatization or effect

You know those rotating restaurants that used to be so popular? Where you step onto the floor at a walking pace but near the window you get a 360 degree view by the time lunch is over? Given that astronauts suffer bone loss and other health problems in the microgravity of orbit - how feasible would it be to take the idea of the rotating restaurant and build a facility on earth where astronauts could live and work for a period before going to space at 1.2 or 1.5 g prior to departure to build up bone mass and maybe prevent the problems? Basically - take this concept, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_wheel_space_station but build it on the surface as a training and work facility. (logically, I know we can do it - what I'm asking is whether it would help)

Biggest thing in the solar system, and one of the hardest to hit. So - is it easier to use Jupiter or Venus to get your garbage tug to hit the sun ?

Tarkov. It's brutal, yet fun. See my thread in the Lounge if interested.

Heh. In the 90s, I was quite competitive in the FPS games I played. I doubt I will ever be a fast reflex guy again - but I still enjoy these types of games... So I gotta work smarter than harder!

There was a thread a while back about some people trying to use, effectively, a rotor to throw stuff at space. I remember a bunch of critiques about it, things like atmospheric density and actual weight to orbit making it a pipe dream. Probably a similar situation

Drone. Looks like noon from the shadows - so that makes stuff look a bit weird Edit - more likely 11 or 1 at second glance.

New concrete work Is that around the same launch platform we are used to seeing?

You can absolutely run your PMC as a Scav - or do a 'Hatchet Run' where you literally only bring in a knife or hatchet. Folks do it all the time for quests. Tarkov recently added a metric to keep people from abusing this, however - making it so you had to meet certain conditions to be 'in raid'. This keeps people from charging naked to the best loot spawn, grabbing everything and running out. In the beginning, however, when I was poor and did not know what I was doing, I would follow my son into a raid with nothing but a pistol, let him kill stuff and I'd loot. Helped with getting to learn the maps. There's a lot of flexibility in what you do. My son likes to take his Scavs in, kill his way to better loot, tank up and then hunt PMCs, as effectively a PMC. He's quite often successful. Time - choosing times - is a factor in every game I've played, and I don't think its a cheap metric. There's no 'leaderboard' so that can't be abused by playing at off hours, but you can find less populated times to avoid the guys who've done everything and are only looking for PVP. The Day-Night cycle also adds an interesting metric. You can't see squat at night - but can use a flashlight, NVGs or Thermals/IR. Not many players choose night - so they're again fair game for missions. Night raids also bring out the weird creepy guy AIs that can really mess you up, but have good loot all their own. It's fun in the sense of 'doing something difficult, and succeeding' is fun. Certainly not 'casual, relaxing entertainment' fun

@mikegarrison might have input. I've read, but don't know for sure, that high-altitude airliners while pressurized are not actually holding sea-level pressure while in flight. Perhaps there's a structural reason beyond keeping the minimum pressure required to keep the cargo alive.

I've spent most of my RU-designed/ market games with World of Tanks (and clones) as well as Tarkov. What WOT had was an on-the-surface simple Tank-skinned FPS arena battle game... but as you played you discovered a ton of hidden / not obvious features where skilled & experienced players could learn and use for advantage over others. Tarkov is similar. My critique of major-studio US games is that they are exactly what you see on the surface. Player-learned knowledge is a minimal requirement for success, rather than surface WYSIWYG and twitch skills. So my impression of RU games is to know how to play at the highest level. ...and I like that.

Rabbit hole time! I'll try to skip over much of the stuff mentioned or alluded to above. That said, I've rarely stumbled upon a shooter game with more detailed and different metrics. We've touched on the weapons modding aspect as well as FPS gameplay - but there's a whole lot more going on under the surface. Kind of like KSP was, for many, a process of discovery where every new game session opened up different possibilities, my experience with Tarkov is one of constant learning. Tarkov is a horror, military, stealth, FPS, RPG, item modding and resource developing game all in one. Let's take a moment to contrast the surface stuff with Battlefield or COD, because that's what gets showcased. Both are easy to access FPS titles with cool graphics, some weapons modding and a gameplay that can be distilled down to effectively "Tag". Getting into a match is fairly easy, players try to rack up kills, die, respawn, go for more kills or capture areas until the game timer ends and one team wins and players get some bragging rights. Rinse Repeat, nothing lost, and whatever progress you are making is always forward. As a player, you really don't have much invested and even if they have a 'hardcore' mode, you can just immediately get back into a match with a fully kitted character, who's full strength from the get go, and keep playing tag. Tarkov is - despite anything that might be showcased on videos or streams - almost nothing like that. I can't stress the issue of 'Time' enough as a factor in this game. The player's economy is similarly important. The two characters you have, PMC and Scav are as I've described above. But a Scav has a 'cooldown timer' after a Raid of approximately 10 minutes. So even if you have a good Raid, or die, you can't just jump back into a match with your Scav. PMCs can be played back to back to back - but you have to kit your PMC. So if you die, you not only have a 'hatchling' with no gun, no armor, no equipment... he's also persistently wounded. You can pay to have him instantly healed, or use items you've found or bought to heal your player, and then equip him with weapons, gear, food, med supplies, etc. - all from what you've successfully extracted with or bought from vendors or other players (the game has a very good 'auction house' for players to sell found items to one another). So while the Scav is free to play, and you cannot lose anything, and any successful run is profit... you have limited time / opportunity to use him. Your PMC on the other hand is expensive. Further - time is a factor because of how long it takes to get into a raid, and to run a raid. You literally 'feel' this investment as you're playing, and can, consequently get 'gear fear' where you play too conservatively out of fear of losing the stuff you've worked so hard to acquire. You might get pumped playing COD or BFx, but you get tense with Tarkov. Anxious. Adrenalin pumping when you win, and disappointed when you die. Between raids, you have a challenge of resource management: what to keep, what to sell, how to equip your character and quite often - how to keep enough inventory space available so that you can actually acquire your Scav's items after a raid. (Great raid? No space? No soup for you! Time? Wasted.) You get to explore modding different weapons to improve ADS time, handling, TTK, recoil, etc. You can't just keep weapons and ammo - you need space for quest items, med supplies, food, crafting supplies, gear, etc. You also have a 'Hideout' which you get to improve that will aid your PMC in healing / recovering (hydration and energy), allow you to craft items to sell or use, test your weapons between raids, etc. etc. There's like 10-12 sub-areas of the Hideout each with its own function and development tree and benefits. The PMC also has a skill progression In order to improve your Hideout, you have to complete quests for NPC 'Dealers'. This 'quest' metric is awesome - because it is constantly sending players to different parts of the maps for more than just 'good loot'. In-game this results in random, unexpected encounters between players throughout the map, along with the higher concentration of AI Scavs in the zones where quest objectives are. Other times, the 'good loot' areas are massive CQB fights or running fights much like you could find in other FPS titles - with one major exception: there are no set 'contact points' or zones to capture that give you or your team an advantage. Seven consecutive runs to the Resort area to try for the good loot will result in seven completely different fights in unexpected places around the Resort. But you have to go to these contested areas to get the good loot to upgrade your hideout, complete quests, sell to get money to equip your PMC, etc. So at long last, we are at Character skill progression - which is a ton of ways where the game keeps track of your in-game experiences and you get to see your PMC improve in abilities, like Recoil Control, or Strength (farther grenade throws), medical skills (faster heals), faster running, faster searching, more stuff you can carry without penalty, better use of certain weapons... the list goes on and on. This is largely passive - but you actually can focus on something; like loading up a pack and running to exhaustion to improve related skills, or doing field-medical on yourself, etc. Anyway - I'm still learning... but for anyone who enjoys FPS gameplay, but is tired of "Tag" - Tarkov is a brutally difficult, immersive game that is worth a look. (Unfortunately, there's no demo - so it really is a full-game purchase price to 'see if you like it'). One last thing: sound. Sound is incredibly important in-Raid. I cannot tell you how many times I have crouched, tense, waiting to figure out which way some other player went or where they are coming from as we both try to silently get advantage over one another. The sound system is excellent - and modified by different gear, skills etc. Really adds to the 'stealth' and immersion of the game.

Atmosphere is a difficult issue from what I can tell - and we have so few terrestrial 'worlds' to view closely. From a simple 'can 1g hold gas to the surface' standpoint - yes. But how much and the composition is decided by other factors. A big factor seems to be the degree to which the world is seismically active. Another factor is (which may be related) if the world has a magnetosphere to shield it from solar wind. Temperatures, distance from the star and where it formed are also factors speculated about. Earth has a moon and volcanoes and a dynamic atmosphere. Venus has volcanoes and an atmosphere. Mars, seismically inactive, no magnetosphere and very little atmosphere. Titan? Atmosphere. Pluto even has some atmosphere, even if only periodically and I've read that there is a tiny thin 'atmosphere' on the Moon - even if it's only temporary and captured gas from earth that's easily depleted by the solar wind. But I don't think you can make a rule that any terrestrial planet around any given star will have an atmosphere of a given density based solely on the degree of g.

Looking at the difference between SNs 5&6 and 8-15, the forward cone sections look empty. Otherwise, the 'work part' of the completed craft looks to be the 5/6 lower portion of the ship. Is there anything in the forward section? I assume that when SX flies / flew the current design they're pressurizing the forward section. Are they simply using atmospheric air - or is it also used for fuel? (because IIRC, the forward section is supposed to be for crew /cargo)

Theirs has blue torus beams being shot from the lander onto Mars - so clearly an advanced and unique design.

Since we've been in the realm of the fantastic for a while... In SF most warp or hyper drive tech is there to solve the distance or 'space' problem in getting from one system to another - getting past the light speed limit found in Relativity. Since Relativity ties space and time together into spacetime, is there any theoretical way to 'solve for time' (rather than solving for speed /distance) that might get future explorers to and from a distant system in a similar manner? (i.e. Are SF writers looking at the wrong side of the equation?)

I've a friend I hope to introduce to the game who loves flight Sims... And has virtually no other interest in gaming. So I hope the SPH and procedural wings are as good as they look - and that the atmospheric flight model feels right to him If so, he's hooked - guaranteed

I accept that - and also as a distinguishing characteristic between it and other FPS titles. Every game has to have something fun! It's just my slowly ossifying brain not adapting quick enough. My kid? He's crushing it. They actually do it well - the RPG progression of the PMC allows you to get better over time (meaning the weapon becomes more controlled).

Why isn't anyone talking about the dynamic lighting? The scene, starting at 1:50 is gorgeous! You can see into the cockpit; the glass lets the star illuminate the interior of the craft and the Kerbal inside. Reflections look fantastic as well.

Grin Case in point @ hidden metrics... Ran a PMC (C1) run where I had to visit three different contested zones on a very large map (think walking through forest and fields between built up areas), where it can easily take 10 minutes just to walk, let alone skulk, from place to place. Along the way I killed five Scavs (AI) and two Player Scavs (C2). Accomplished the mission I had and was looking to extract. Except the extract was closed. So I had to turn around and start walking to a different corner of the map... only to die of dehydration. Fail. Silly me: I forgot to take water onto a big map. No one tells you you need water - you discover this the hard way. Also, the game does not tell you whether some extracts are open or not. FWIW - good GUI is good customer relations! I have friends who love hex editing stuff - probably because they can. Folks like me? We need good GUI! @YNM - there is one Russian metric I'm having a hard time adjusting to: automatic fire. The game rewards putting the gun on full auto and spraying. As a former Marine... this just irks me. I typically used automatic weapons prone, on a bipod or tripod. Even Burst on the M-16A2 was only for very close quarters; we tried it on a paper target 50m away, and the first round was center mass, the second over the target and the third lost in space. So 'muscle memory' is to use semi-auto... but this is a Russian game - so doing that is a distinct disadvantage.

As someone with quite a bit of weapon knowledge... I really appreciate what they've done. If only modding weapons were so easy (and cheap). There is actually quite a bit to admire with what the Dev team has accomplished so far - especially given that it's a long term beta.

I'm only a month into the game, and still getting a feel for it. Typical of Russian titles I've played, it's like "Here's a game. Looks simple on the surface... but there are a LOT of rules and metrics we're not going to tell you about. Have fun!" (Another refrain: "It's not supposed to be fun... it's supposed to be hard!") Thus - I'm trying to develop a strategy for how to deal with a culture where some players leave you alone and others do not and you cannot know, ever, which one you're running into... ... And despite all this uncertainty and frustration - I keep logging on!

I'm convinced that the dots are just there to make sure that each line is printed correctly with the next. 12 independent and interesting systems if remotely as detailed as the first one might prove a bridge too far... Unless FutureTech = StarTrek

I got a different sense from you hearing the same words. The Dev that mentioned having fun initially, but never getting to the Mun, and the other that had a friend walk him through every step... I heard them acknowledge player experience that might have caused all but the most dedicated to walk away from the first one. KSP 2 will hopefully be everything the most hardcore KSP player is looking for in a '2' - but also be something that makes a casual want to stick with just a bit longer than they might have with the original. I'm one of those guys who can get to both moons.... ...but who finds getting to the other planets daunting. Perhaps 2 will help me get a better idea of what is going on and let me explore further

C1 players have a distinctive military appearance. AI and C2s look like kitted up civilians. C1 play is straightforward - everything is your enemy and target. Most missions involve you killing C1s, C2s and AI - so when you go in, you are in fight mode and geared accordingly. The only real risk for a lone C1 is running into a group of C1 players who teamed up pre-match. Running into a team of C2s can be a coin toss - the C1 might tank both or kill one before dying. C1 teams are common. The C2 play is challenging. Team up with a friend pre-match and you can be a lot more confident on the map. Players are unlikely to 'adopt' one another once in match. They could - and perhaps the Devs are working towards this... But... Perhaps impromptu coop is not unheard of - but far more common for C2s who find themselves fighting the same C1 crew to have one turn on the other after the engagement. The most frustrating part is that you can move into a building, be surprised by an ambush ready AI - and then nothing happens... It was a friendly AI. You are safe and can safely loot. Except that sometimes the 'friendly AI' waits for you to loot several areas and then when you are ready to move on - they kill you (because they're actually a C2) then scarper off with your backpack while you are back to the home screen. So ultimately it's the uncertainty that is the issue