Xurkitree
-
Posts
777 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Xurkitree
-
-
-
SR 2 is built with the intention of moving to a mobile platform. Hence, the PC release is where all the bugs are hammered out. Most likely, to optimise for mobile devices, the controls are built with touchscreens in mind, and to save on parts, models, textures and data, everything is procedural.
-
Do tell me guys.
In an n-body simulation, how do you set up the initial orbital parameters of Rask and Rusk such that they start orbiting together from the start? There isn't any central point around which they can be parented, and neither can they be set up to collapse to a binary after loading around whatever star they're around.
Meanwhile, for a body-on-rails thing, one can put them around a barycentre at the start. Maybe the barycentre can have some sort of HazardousBody effect that causes Ships to explode before they can come close enough for extreme orbital maneuvers.
Please, think about the practicalities of setting up such a system on the epoch, rather than thinking about its stability. AFAIK, even Principia can't set up Binaries from the outset. Its easier to just go for patched conics to set this up, and let the Kraken guard the barycentre.
-
5 hours ago, KerikBalm said:
Gravity doesn't work like that, you'd also have a naked singularity that would open up all kinds of abuse and would require modelling relativity to stop FTL speeds. Naked singularities plus a small burn right near the singularity = Holy Oberth-ing *expletive*!
Yes, Its not so bad if one body is smaller than the other by a significant amount. Duna outmasses Ike by 20:1 for instance... and orbits relatively high over Duna just around the edge of Ike's SOI aren't realistic.
Its even worse in my mod world Rald, when I had it as a moon of Kerbin, or when I had Duna as a moon of it.
Its basically a matter of "overlook the lack of realism of the orbits between these two bodies"
I'm very interested in trying out Principia, but I worry about the performance hit
The issue with the naked singularitiy is also kraken attacks. Venture too close and the kraken gets you.
-
This has to be the fastest growing thread in the forums right?
Anyways, come on SQUAD, I want news on KSP 1.8! Don't leave us hanging with just Mun and Duna revamps! What about Eve?! Dres?! Jool?! I wanna know more about 1.8! And I sure hope there's 1.9!
-
Volume 2 in KSP 2. Please make it happen lmao.
-
boy i hope there are low graphic settings for poor GPUs. Also better optimisations to run on weaker PCs.
-
We can finally yeet this topic out the window with KSP 2
-
10 minutes ago, birdog357 said:
Why are you guys coming up with these convoluted hack job ideas? The simplest solution is that they used the clean slate and started with n-body from the get-go. Principia shows that it can be hacked on top of the original game so why couldn't they integrate it from the beginning with the sequel?
Because Principia doesn't deal with too many bodies well and it would mean altering the Jool System. Also how would one set the inital orbit of the binaries? It's perfectly possible for a binary to be present in Principia, but what are their original orbits? The solution for this is to create an n body simulation that merges them into a binary after the game starts, but it would be weird and too much effort.
5 hours ago, TBenz said:My guess? 3 SOIs. 1 large main one for the barycenter, and 2 smaller ones, one for each planet. It's probably the best way to represent a binary system with KSP's patched conic and SOI approximation of gravity. Assuming KSP2 doesn't actually dive off the deep end and try to tackle N-body simulation. The biggest issue is the question of what happens exactly at the barycenter? From what I understand of how KSP1 works, the physics would (somewhat) break down there. Perhaps they've fixed that for #2?
Visualization of what I mean:
You could get some pretty interesting orbits with that kind of setup. Have a station orbiting around the barycenter between Rask and Rusk. Or an orbit that dives between them and back out the other side. Or maybe even a stable "orbit" that bounces between Rask and Rusk's SOIs.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. I've dealt with lava binaries in the making of my planet mod so that's how I pulled it off.
-
-
Ksp 3 memes when
-
If you're creating a barycentre, generally it's a extremely small body with the combined mass of both bodies, so it approaches neutron star black hole levels of density. No, figure 8s arent possible, but barycentre dives could be.
Of course the implementation could be completely different,like allowing the creations of point sized or a single source of gravity without a body, that sorta thing. But binaries, especially a cool one like lava world binaries needs to be there, realism or no.
-
1 hour ago, theJesuit said:
Not actual in game footage... or is it?
Peace.
It isn't actual gameplay, but it is a render of what it might look like. It looks Hella cool, I always wanted lava worlds.
-
HOLY excrements YES
-
So um this could be Rask and Rusk (thanks to JadeOfMaar for pointing this out)
-
MY HYPE KNOWS NO BOUNDS
-
The kerbals could use improvments. The skin appears glossy, compared to normal skin, and their eyes are not properly done. Hopefully this is fixed going into release.
-
HYPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
KSP 2 Trailer crashing my night like
-
somebody pin this. I think this is the 10th time listening to this.
-
You know, we were all laughing when I suggested that the planet updates in 1.8 was simply buildup to a new planet in KSP 1 - AND INSTEAD WE GOT KSP 2 PLANET YEET
-
Just now, KerbolExplorer said:
And it even seems that it will have better tutorials!
I aswell had some friends that liked KSP but never really got into it because of the learning curve and it was at an age where the translation didn't exist and my friend being spanish they didn't understand a thing of the already bad tutorials
It's sad that as far as i know i'm the only one at my high school that even knows KSP exists
I'm surprised by the number of people who have heard/played ksp, although none of them played/play them as much as i do.
Also thanks for the music thing, I'm hype!
-
WAIT ONE MORE
Damn i should really get my wishes straight.
BETTER MUSIC. Custom tracks.
Even nicer would be the ability to substitute our own.
-
5 minutes ago, Climberfx said:
So, the question is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?
Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?
Very far. Its completely rendered in what ever animation software the new devs are using. But the art direction seems solid, so hopefully it should transfer into gameplay as well.
-
Just now, KerbolExplorer said:
I can run KSP with scatterers and EVE at 30 fps i could play like that so hopefully the game is well enought optimized or isn't graphically intense on my PC
I am really worried about my graphics card tho,I got an NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 and it doesn't seem good enought for gaming in 2019
(I can run Subnautica BZ 15 fps and thats good enought for me so MAYBE the Graphics card wont be a big isiue
dude i have an Intel HD 620, using scatterer immediately causes the game to stutter
Kerbal Space Program 2: Master Post
in 2019
Posted
MWAHAHAHAHA ITS KERBOL NOW WHO'S GOING TO STOP ME, THE SUN?
bruh, its already declared they're using unity. Unity is also a proper engine, and this time they won't be hacking on solutions onto it, and they will be using one of newer versions.
Also, the team developing KSP 2 is completely seperate from KSP 1, much less the people who made this in the first place. They clearly decided that using Unity for round 2 would be for the best.