JoeSchmuckatelli

Then it's most likely my other thought: some kind of placement of something is creating a physics stress between parts. There was an explosion of some kind - and then the ship stopped shaking.

I call that the "Earthquake Bug". I wrote about it in detail, here: ( Link ) My guess is that it had to do with Farings. With my experience, it shook the whole launch platform (and KSC) prior to launch; and the craft shook regularly until I discarded the farings. After that it was gone. Can't tell from your vid - but did you have farings on that craft?

I keep flipping between unbridled optimism thanks to the glimpses of the grand vision of the developers and frustration with the current Communications Strategy around the present state of the game. I'm hoping that via the next couple of patches we can get back on track with the Roadmap! To that end - and as I work around the bugs and enjoy what I can get to work - I notice that I miss being constrained by the game elements of KSP. In fact, I rarely ever used the Sandbox mode in KSP - unless I wanted to try something out with parts I did not have. There was a real joy in cobbling together a craft that was barely capable of getting my payload to orbit - and after several tries, recreations and rebuilds with the parts at my disposal - finally getting to orbit and my destination. That gave a sincere and distinct sense of accomplishment. It's what made KSP a game. I think Sandbox is perfect for the current bug hunt. But with Sandbox, I'm just building overpowered crafts that are effectively SSTO - leaving me with an overbuilt second stage that can easily accomplish the mission (when the game works). The accomplishment feeling is 'yaay - it didn't break!' not 'wow, that was hard, but I did it!'. I know that Nate has talked about Colonies and Resource Extractions bringing progression elements to KSP - and I'm very excited to see what the team has in store for us! I also know that will come after Science - and to that end, I hope that Science does include some form of progression. I know people critical of the old system: doing a Crew Report in Orbit over the Mun doesn't link up with an advancement in Jet Propulsion (unlocks). But clunky as it was - the constraints on unlocks forced players to 'work with what they had'... and that was a good thing. Regardless of what Science adds to KSP2, the increased content and 'things to do' will be greatly appreciated. I just hope that it also adds somewhat of a progression system to make KSP2 feel like a game. Fingers crossed!

https://kotaku.com/please-stop-closing-forums-and-moving-people-to-discord-1847684851 Forums create a record, an archive we can search through, so that whenever we want to revisit issues, or find help with a problem, or see what was happening during a certain time, we can do that. There’s a paper trail, and while sometimes that leads to embarrassing takes on tv shows and game reveals, other times it’s providing an enormous help with technical issues or parts of a game you’re stuck on. Discord simply can’t provide that. It’s a river running in real-time, and while it does have search functions, the way the whole app is structured means you’re simply never going to get the same levels of detailed discussion or archived information as we can get from forums. If places want to open a Discord and run that as something else, then cool, but using it as a replacement for forums is a disaster. https://www.mooreds.com/wordpress/archives/3451 Hot take after a year or so of trying to build a developer community. If you can pick only one, use forum software rather than synchronous chat software for community building around a developer platform. While there are tradeoffs in terms of convenience and closeness, for most developer communities a public, managed forum is better than a private, unsearchable Slack. There are a few key differences between forum software (which includes packages like nodebb, forem, discourse, and others) and chat software (like Slack, Facebook groups, or Discord ... When you are in a chat system, the information is ephemeral. This means that valuable comments can be lost if there is a flurry of other messages. ... This means when you use a chat for a developer community, you don’t get compounding benefits when someone, either a team member or a community member, answers a question well or has an insightful comment that would be worth reading. Very few folks ever benefit in the future. With chat, people who aren’t present at message posting or soon thereafter never learn from that knowledge ... But for developer communities, friendly chat is important, but so is sharing knowledge; the memory hole actively thwarts the latter. Forums, on the other hand, are optimized for reading. nodebb even suggests related posts as you begin a topic, actively directing people to older posts that may solve their issue without them ever posting. And if published on the internet, forums are searched via Google

Can you two quit dancing about and smooch already?

Vis the KSP2 VeryPublic Alpha/Beta? Discord is the wrong place to be for where the game is. - It's a bad fit. Here: Read this - more detail Discord is walled off; you have to be a member to see what's going on. ... In general? Discord is fine, if you're into what it does I'm not.

Desktop. I'm pretty sure it has to do with the lack of optimization in the PQS system; the worst offenders are some of the terrestrial areas with a lot of polygons.

I just watched @ShadowZone 's interview with Nate from just before release.* SZ's presumption is that the developers knew what condition the game was in - and that 'management' (my word) rushed / set an arbitrary date for them to release to EA. It had to go out on the date come hell or high water. And it did. Nate mentions the one thing that will likely be the biggest performance enhancement: refining the PQS System. (The Planet Making System) Given that that is likely a big overhaul, and my impression from the interview is that it was an ongoing project before the release... I don't expect it to be part of the first patch. It could be; I just don't expect it. He did talk about the process: Find the biggest resource hog, tame it; find the next biggest. Those actually sounded like two parallel processes - Taming PQS is a long term, not easily solved thing that is a work in progress - the other is regular refinement. So I would expect some performance enhancement with the patch... just not likely to be the one that causes FPS drops like those from looking at space as the background vs a planetary body as the background. Another thing from the video that comports with what I've seen over these last two weeks - there's a lot of stuff in this build that is wrong, that they could not have NOT known about. So the likelihood is that the patch work isn't just 'look what these intrepid players discovered' it's also fixing stuff they've known about for a while. Final note: while I've been doing my bug hunting and reporting stuff on the forums - I keep running into this line of thought where people are liquided that they haven't patched it yet. I think that wishing for a rushed patch is counter productive. My biggest gripe is how poorly the community interaction and contact has been. I get that a project this big has a lot of moving parts and there is greater risk from rushing a bad update out too soon than there is from taking their time and putting out a well thought, well coded patch later. I'm fine with that. But they should be talking to us. I've tried to explain this elsewhere - but let me try again. The Communications Strategy seems to be PrivateDivision driven - by an expectation that they were releasing a fun-to-play and largely functional game that was awaiting some key elements of 1.0 to be polished, and those big content releases would be fed to players in the order outlined in the roadmap. In other words, a functioning EA title. They have Ghostii doing fun tik-toks and showcasing quirky builds, people on Twitter doing fun things and linking to positive articles, they're all over Discord where people can just spam thoughts and they get large numbers of bodies daily -- all of which would be acceptable if the game was what we expected (and likely what PD wrote their Communication Strategy around) : functioning, fun and awaiting key elements. That strategy would be fine if the game were as performant as other EA titles - like Satisfactory (for example). The game did not release functioning like an EA title. It released like an Alpha/Beta hybrid with a few EA elements. You talk with Alpha/Beta players differently than you do with EA communities. You acknowledge the bugs. You collect the bugs - communicate priorities and tell the testers what you're working on. You under promise and over deliver. You don't ignore them - or keep up some semblance of your original marketing plan when the game is this buggy. Case in point: Dakota's content That's my beef. They're not communicating with us in any way that reflects the reality of the game. That failure of communication is actually accelerating the reputational harm. Increasing the frustration. They should be managing expectations - not ignoring them. * Video Link

To follow up... One might nod in the direction of Satisfactory. Link Such was my hope for the EA experience with KSP2. Or...

My subject is exactly communication. My comment on the state of the game is to showcase that for different experiences, different communication strategies should be employed.

Me either. Rock solid

I still don't know if I'm doing this correctly. But - it's been working better. I'm hitting the 'hold target' button for the burn. In KSP I typically had them hold prograde (mind you, I almost never went anywhere other than the moons) and that always seemed to work. Prograde is clearly the wrong way to do it in KSP2... but hold target does seem fine.

I've a similar story from yeas ago. Did not pay attention to my PSU through several upgrades and then fried the Mobo. Wasn't fun, but it was educational!

I'd appreciate it if you did. I can't (won't) access Discord

It would not be if all systems were go and the team was pushing content and challenges to a community of happy gamers. Discord may be perfect for the light Fluffy stuff. Instead we are in a situation where regular long-form communications (especially with the community here that has been established for upwards of ten years) is practically required to help allay the valid concerns of purchasers. Yet what we've been treated to is an uncomfortably long silence after an unexpectedly buggy release and word of layoffs - the latter of which seems to be the only prod towards communication. 4.8% of the purchasers are regularly testing. There are very few indicators of what bugs are being worked on (like an updated 'known bugs and priorities' post). The major disconnect is that the game seems to be an Alpha / Beta hybrid - with some EA features... And yet the communication strategy is that of a fully functional EA that is working and only awaiting content before 1.0. Fact is they should be communicating with us like most companies do with Alpha teams or Open Beta communities... And they are not. So - maybe the first patch rolls out and all these concerns are moot. But if not - and they continue the policy of silence and 'hey all is nominal'... The reputation damage is going to drive interested people away for a long time.

No, but Bob is now a Lvl 23 Gnome WarMage!

Your poor framerates! I feel for you! Dedication is hard. Get a "lightly used" mining 3090 and have fun!

That is the most awesome thing I've seen in a while! Do you mind adjusting the font size? This is interesting info, but it comes across as really alarmist (and not quite believable because of that. On the other hand the site you link to is normal looking and better presented). Also - see below for more technical reasons why we should not panic.

Okay - now I'm curious. Why use PC components to run MacOS? Follow on Q: ... isn't running Windows on a machine with PC components... ...just a PC? Why not use a different HD and just boot into Windows when you want to run windows, and keep your Hackintosh stuff on a different drive for Hackintoshing?

It's been persistent across saves and even a shut down-reload. Time to create a new 'Campaign' and see if that helps.

You did a nice job with that vid!

Thanks for the very cogent answer!

Tried to go to Duna today using this handy-dandy map. Except the planets won't move under full (or any) warp. So... no trips for me. If the planets don't align - y'aint goin nowhare!

Was going to attempt a Duna intercept - but I can't get the planetary alignment if the planets don't move during warp. Is this a known issue? (Fully cognizant I could just be doing something wrong...)

@CatWithAJetpack Duffer Question: When in orbit and selecting Duna as the target - should I get (don't know what to call it) the plane change icons to show up? I see those when going to the moons; if I'm off plane I know to adjust the plane to improve my chances of an intercept. In my current game, I'm trying to get to Duna... but have no plane change icons (the places where you burn normal/antinormal to ensure alignment with the target). Don't know if that's normal or not. ...and for some reason the planets won't move when I'm warping in Space Center view; so maybe something else is going on?