Suedocode

Rather than crashes, how many Krakens have ya'll run into? I haven't started a new career yet because I'm waiting for KCT to officially update, but I'm a tad worried after seeing this reddit post since the main thing I was looking forward to in 1.2 was more stable large station construction. I had "station death wobbles" all over my last game before I was forced to use KIS/KAS to weld it in space rather than use docking ports.

Even with USI-LS, having fertilizer to last months isn't that hard and it's pretty easy to generate 500+ science per month with them (iirc, I only tested it once in a cheated science mode and decided it was too OP to use).

This would go a long way in balancing it. Each sample should have 3 segments: Transmission for partial credit Return for full credit (really depends on what you base your scale on, but semantics) Process in lab before returning for bonus credit. (Note, should not have to return the lab itself; the sample only needs to dock with a vessel that has a lab at some point) OR boost to 100% transmission Of course, these bars are global per sample type. To me, the labs should be something you bring to the Mun for extra science or to Duna for a remote science base that can analyze the samples there and just send the data back.

Update after 1.2: You mentioned that the mechanics of the synergy stuff has changed, however the wiki page still hasn't changed its descriptions. Are they still out of date? It sounded like you were going to change the percentages, but perhaps not the mechanic itself. If that is true, my questions from before are still unclear to me: Do the percentage boosts apply to both parts, or just one? If just one, then which? If applicable, how they apply to the recycling bonuses of Aeroponics? is it x4 more Kerbals affected? Cause that'd be supremely awesome since large Kerbal populations would have such huge staff overhead for support. Am I mathing correctly when I determine that these boosts determine the optimal ratios of parts? For instance, you should have 4 Nom-O-Matic 25000 to every MKS/OKS Aeroponics for optimal output.

The physics is done on the processor, not the graphics card (for this game). It should be noted that 1.2 is very noticeably much faster as well; I had a 700+ part station without much issue until I slammed it into the ground. Also, it's important to specify which generation of i7 you have.

The issue is not your graphics card choking (or it really shouldn't be), but rather KSP trying to simulate very large objects. If it were just rendering the object and doing nothing else, it'd be no problem. Case in point, there's a mod that allows you to construct whatever craft you want, and then weld it all into one giant physics object. It completely breaks alters all of the physics dealing with it, but you get buttery smooth performance. The physics, not graphics, are generally what chokes your machine. There are some mods that include clouds and distant object rendering that do hurt performance, but mods tend to do that. Never thought I'd see someone use NMS as a positive example, but how exactly does KSP not have seamless transitions? I would say KSP's transitions are even more seamless, because you don't just burn right through the atmosphere into the land section. NMS has a space mode and an atmosphere mode. KSP does that, and everything in between. Both have model resolution refining details as you get closer. It is true that KSP models are a lower polygon count than NMS, and NMS is a lot more prismatically colored. The latter is a design choice, but perhaps the former could use some work. Honestly though, I think the graphics fit the Kerbal universe just fine. I'd bet you'd get way more bang for your buck if they added clouds (mod available), (graphical) waves (mod available), fauna (NMS abuses this one), and more interesting bump-mapping on rocky surfaces (would just be visual; rovers are hard enough to drive straight). Making higher polygon-count planets and parts I think is not necessary (although re-texturing the oil-barrel fuel tanks would be nice, but there's mods for that too).

Use this mod, nerf your science in career mode to 60%, and don't use the MPL ever because it's OP as hell no matter what you do. Personally, I think the MPL should boost the maximum transmission value of science to up to 100% (as in get 100% of the possible science via transmission), depending on scientists aboard. Maybe one day when I learn to mod... but for now, MPL is game breaking and it's much more challenging without it.

Here's the steps of my attempts to build it in orbit: Step 1: Assemble. Looks good so far Step 2: There's one minor issue, but this is to be expected since multi-port docking isn't a thing. Step 3: Begin merging! I merged the section with the janky edge first to get it out of the way. So far so good. I used cubic octagonal struts to get your ports to be pseudo-surface attached. Step 4: Merge the next section. Uhhhh...? The port severed completely from the edge section, and now the node section is free-floating. Step 5: MAYHEM!! I merged in order just to see what the end result would be. It's quite amusing. Interestingly, my RCS controls trigger on all of the separated pieces (notice the RCS puffs). It still seems to think it's all one big station (controls are linked), but individual sections are free floating. There's some super weird joint things going on as well.

It's an equilateral triangle: My issue is that during the docking procedure itself, no matter how carefully I insert, the magnetic pulls are too strong and wobble my accuracy a bit before slamming into each other. It'd be nice if they could pivot after docking at least.

The only way to construct this station would be to use multiple ports at some point (I think?).

I ended up asking this question in General when the second half should have been asked here. Will you be able to weld multiple ports together? In order for that to work, there would have to be an option to replace the ports with a fuselage instead of offsetting the new part over the gap. I guess multi-port docking would also have to work in stock, but I think it's supposed to?

I would really like to make a hex station, but I'm having issues connecting my joints. I lined this up as best I can, but I can't seem to lock onto both ports simultaneously. As you can see, the green circle docked just fine but the red circle is all janky: Is there a way to get both ports to dock?

Sauce?

Interesting how you guys have exact opposite methodologies. I can't use a 55-60km re-entry because I'll end up skipping off the atmosphere. I can't target a landing destination very well like that, and spending more time is expensive because I play with life support. I'll try the 0 altitude periapsis when I get home. My spaceplane usually enters at about 45 degrees from prograde and keeps it that way for as long as possible until the atmosphere forces it into prograde flight. Despite all that, the cockpit really heats up even as soon as I hit 50km. I've had a ton of landings with the cockpit still at nearly critical temperature, where all other parts are fine. I'll try to post images to give an example (although I don't know how to embed images on this website).

So this is Man's Sky? Fly safe...

Lighter than fuselage?

I think this is a well-known problem throughout many versions of ksp, but (I believe) because the Mk2 cockpit is a single all-in-one nosecone, it generates a monstrous amount of re-entry heat. I have trouble not exploding the thing on relatively gentle reentry angles (40km periapsis) just returning from 450k orbits (still true in 1.2 despite pointy-object aerodynamic changes). The inline Mk2 and Mk3 cockpits have separate parts as noses (like a shielded docking port) which seems to disperse the heat better and solve the issue. Just about any re-entry is quite harrowing with the Mk2. Is this the intended (rather than simply emergent) behavior of the Mk2 cockpit? I wish there was a way to add more ablative coating at the cost of increased weight, but that is perhaps getting into modding territory. It does look pretty damn good imo though, so I'd hate to have to switch to the inline Mk2.

You're being unrealistically optimistic about this.

That's ingenious... 600 hours in the game and I'm still learning stock tricks to do things.

Ahh, I will have to wait for 1.2 and the info websites to be updated after all. I appreciate all the hard work; 1.2 is looking phenomenal!

Presumably he wouldn't change what the numbers mean though, even if he does tweak the numbers themselves. I just want to make sure I'm understanding this synergy stuff. It's not quite clear to me if the boost applies to the "Efficiency Part", to the "Primary Part", or to both. Seeing the term "synergy" makes me think it's both, but I'm not so sure. For instance, getting 50% recycling bonuses for 100 kerbals would require 20 Aeroponics modules and 20 crew members operating them. Does an Aeroponics/Agriculture combo give 6*5=30 supplies AND 5*5=25 recycling kerbal bonuses (500% OKS boost), or is it just the first one?

I'm designing my stuff in pre 1.2 so that I have all of my blueprints ready for 1.2. I'm trying to plan out my tourism space station, but I don't know what all I need to fit on it until I figure out how much life support stuff it needs.

I am reading about RoverDude's life support mod with the advanced stuff added. I was crunching some numbers on how to support 100 tourist Kerbals, and it ended up being pretty nasty with requiring a huge overhead of working kerbals in Aeroponics and Agriculture modules. And then I found this synergy chart: Primary Part Efficiency Part Boost MK-III Mobile Refinery MK-V Smelter +100% MK-III Mobile Refinery MK-V Sifter +100% MK-III Mobile Refinery OKS Workspace +100% MK-III Fabricator MK-V Workshop +100% MK-III Fabricator OKS Workspace +100% MK-III Sifter MK-V Smelter +100% MK-III Sifter MK-V Sifter +100% MK-III Sifter MK-V Crusher +100% MK-III Sifter OKS Workspace +100% OKS Aeroponics OKS Agriculture +500% OKS Aeroponics Nom-O-Matic 25000 +400% MKS Aeroponics MK-V Agriculture +200% MKS Aeroponics Nom-O-Matic 25000 +400% So if I want to support 100 non-working Kerbals as efficiently as possible (in terms of fertilizer consumption, keeping in mind that working kerbals also consume additional supplies), and OKS Agriculture supports 6 kerbals(?), will one Aeroponics and one Agriculture support 6*5=30 kerbals (28 non-working)? Of course, the recycling rate is only 11.7% per kerbal on average (unless the boost also applies to the recycling value?). Is there anywhere that shows what the most efficient set up is, or do I need to crunch the numbers myself? I'm happy to hear any guidance beyond the basic stuff of what a large-scale Kolony's infrastructure should be composed of.

It gives no more ability than what it currently available, but the difference is that it greatly reduces the tedium of manually adjusting all of the satellites across the chosen relay path. Having to load every satellite relay network to adjust what dishes point where to establish a connection doesn't really add much to the game. NASA would almost certainly reconfigure an existing network as needed rather than sending a bunch of redundant dishes all around the solar system.

Similar, but more general. For instance, if I want to do Duna->Moho->Kerbin, I have to do one of two things: Duna switches a dish from pointing to Kerbin to point to Moho Moho switches "Active Vessel" to Duna, assumed another is still pointing at Kerbin Switch back to vessel This requires a minimum of 3 vessel switches each time I want to bounce a signal around, where each relay needs 2 directional dishes*. OR Every relay has enough satellites to point to every planetary body and "Active Vessel Now everything just instantly works, but at the cost of monstrous relay satellites that require an abominable amount of power and a plethora of dishes. With the proposed system, I could still have my relay network with 2 directional dishes with one set to Receive and another set of Transmit. Now, case 1 automatically happens: Duna's Recieve points at Active Vessel, Transmit points to Moho. Moho's Recieve points to Duna, Transmit points to Kerbin Basically, let the path finding algorithm configure the dishes optimally rather than having to manually do it each time.You probably don't even need the dish modes at all; you can just have the dishes figure out what they need to be. As long as there are at least two on the craft, it should be able to be a general relay I think. *EDIT: Alternatively, you'd only need one dish and one omni per satellite if you let one satellite at Moho receive through the dish, send through an omni to a nearby satellite, who then forwards the signal back to Kerbin through a dish. Way more efficient, but way more tedious.