Incarnation of Chaos

Alright; thanks. That would explain....actually quite a lot. I have some tests to run when i finally begin getting my KSP mod install sorted out on my main rig xD Hopefully one of my other installed mods isn't sending them into negative values (It should have exception handling for this, but now i know it's a possibility). And FAR kinda just breaks stock completely; like everything produces way less lift, but drag is also reduced. But since i haven't played with stock aero since discovering it i never realized the difference until getting other Plane Part mods and seeing how drastically different in mass they were for similar lifting area. I think if i end up finding out what's going on, i might just add another variant in the TT later on. They're fine until late-game when I'm trying to do larger craft and the square-cube law starts eating my lunch. All for my own personal use ofc. And yeah...now that i recall the Mass/Strength slider might have been part of FAR, and is probably where I'd need to look for the mass value in the first place.

Is this why these are always some of the heaviest wings in my mod install? Even with mass/strength ratio set to 1? Does FAR set the scaling if detected; or is another value used instead? Mostly asking because i wouldn't want to go poking for a value if it wasn't in your mod (Or rather wasn't used in this specific case).

Back to the OP though "Significant Portions of the world were flooded due to a loss of precision" is one of the most hysterical entries Iv'e ever seen in a development thread.

Except it really isn't; it just shifts the elusive common ancestor somewhere else. And i would heavily doubt whatever microbe might be floating in the clouds now would be too closely related either. Plus, Mars and Venus were both reasonably habitable at this point in time. Why would it just be a two-way exchange? It could've very well been a three-way exchange, with multiple stages of material being ejected from each to the other and back over millions of years. At which point that brings in another set of issues. Don't get me wrong; i really like the idea of "Panspermia". But until we get a decent presence on all 3 bodies i think it's going to continue to be elusive at best to prove. Doubly so on Venus, because unless something miraculous happened somewhere on Venus there's going to be no fossil evidence of anything except cataclysmic volcanic eruptions. Let alone microbes...best we might be able to do is find a primitive martian organism and whatever might be in Venus's atmosphere and sequence both...assuming either exist in the first place. Oh and then there's the really, really fun option #3 Life, simple microbial life developed independently on all 3 planets, and never crossed over. At which point; we'd now have to ask how. And also has the rather dire implication for the Fermi paradox that life is so common that it will spool up wherever it can, and we're surrounded by potentially habitable worlds.....many which have a 100+ year head start. Mind you; this is just me really saying in way too many words "We need to stop messing around and get out there" again

I'm aware, believe me. But we're past the point of people wanting just "Bigger and better", and been past it since the beginning. I just wanted to being some reason back to the discussion, not dismiss the effort entirely. KSP2 will very much be a better game than KSP1 given time, but that also comes with some pretty hard limits. Some things are easy to add in later, like graphics. But some things literally force you into a single avenue from that moment forward, like the usage of only one terrain layer. Knowing the difference is what helps separate reasonable expectations from essentially fan fiction. That's really what i was trying to drive home. KSP2 will also likely perform much better, and will be built from the ground up to support multiple systems. Thus the performance of any mods using multiple systems will be increased, unburdened by the compromises and workarounds KSP requires. There's a lot of good things to look forward too, but that's if they deliver. I haven't seen anything close to a Zero Bug Release in years, and that's from any game. So perhaps i was a bit harsh, but i cant imagine KSP2 being anything close to stable on release.

What about a chemo-synthetic organism that uses the hilarious amounts of UV to assist in breaking down the Sulfuric Acid? That's what I'd be thinking of if i thought it was life; especially since there's similar extremophiles on earth. Mind you i think it's actually that we don't know the geology/atmosphere of Venus as well as we'd like to think and some non-biotic process is responsible. But the idea that it's some Silicon-Based organism or even more far-fetched ideas (There's a vocal minority that REALLY wants it to be a ancient, intelligent civilization that polluted itself to extinction....despite how absolutely absurd that is (The complex life developing; not the pollution).) i think is pretty much a distraction. If it's something weird that's fantastic! But it's more than likely way, way closer to something we find near geysers here or around hydrothermal vents if it is life at all, and i think people get way too caught up in that prospect. Venus's Atmosphere hasn't been well sounded, and the surface has only been really touched by a few probes and RADAR scans. There's likely so much geology we just don't know about because of how hostile the planet is, and how little attention it's gotten. So i guess the bottom line to me is, that no matter what we should probably give Venus a few missions. Because if nothing else; this has revealed a big blindspot in our backyard that we'd likely benefit from making a little clearer.

So I'm just going to state this first; this in no way is to take away from what GamesLinx has done. Because it's much, much more than I'd honestly be willing to do, and honestly it's probably easier to just roll your own game once you get this far. But, all he did was use APIs and DX11 features Unity had exposed that Squad neglected to use. He did SQUAD's job FOR them; which SQUAD should be ashamed of. Dude deserves a check from SQUAD in my opinion once it comes out of beta.. (60-80 hours of pay at a comp rate for a CS dev at the least; if not some extra). KSP has always had the potential to look much better, but the lack of staff at SQUAD, and other factors have prevented it from doing so. But KSP has always been a massively CPU bound game, and there's always been massive headroom for graphics. But i see so many people here talking about terrain, and the thing is that KSP2 is still using a single layer for it like KSP. And it's been in development for several years at least, so while there's the potential for statically placed models/objects/scatters. Everyone needs to really, really temper their expectations for terrain; because this isn't something they're just going to be able to patch in later. It's pretty much locked in, and changing it later would break so many things that it's incredibly unlikely they would. Raytracing however is dirt easy to patch in, along with most other graphical effects. So that's why some people tend to "Dismiss" them. They're not worth chasing if it means other features have to hit the chopping block floor because of it, and to be honest most are still on 1000 series and RX 400 series cards....that launched over 3 years ago. Raytracing won't be mainstream for at least that long, and when it does become mainstream it won't be too hard to patch in. There are core features, gameplay loops and systems that all deserve far more attention. But KSP2 isn't going to be whatever you have in your head, that's pretty clear at this point. I'd love Spore: KSP edition just as much as the next guy, but we HAVE to be realistic about what we're getting here. We're not getting a massively budgeted, moonshot project from a massive studio with incredible experience and deep pockets. We're getting a Decently optimized, Marginal increased scope KSP1 with most of the jank cut out by a Development Team that's been poached by a massive publisher and was likely in Development Hell well before then. If KSP2 functions well AT ALL on release and doesn't have MULTIPLE showstopper bugs, then I'll consider that a win.

Dude a mod literally moved it from the KSP1 suggestions section xD

KSP2 already looked significantly better than KSP, so I don't get it. Personally I don't really care too much about the graphics. If KSP2 has working wheels and legs and delivers the increased part counts it's worth the purchase for me. But I've been thinking about all of this for a while, and I think the best option for graphics would be a good array of settings in the base game and a free 'DLC' to enable crazier or more demanding settings. But that's on the assumption that they're not wasting time right now making pretty explosions instead of working wheel colliders. I want a rock solid foundation first and foremost, everything else is secondary.

There's really no comparison; Visual Studio is a fully featured IDE. Code is Notepad ++ with C# support and a much worse UI. There's people who love Code, but I've always found it an absolute pain to use compared to Visual Studio.

I'm astonished that i haven't seen this earlier. Does it support Tweakscale? Or nah?

What's "Relatively Cheap"? 300 USD? 600 USD? A number; even if it's just a ballpark estimate is kinda needed. Desktop? Laptop? The latter is going to be much more expensive for decent performance.

Note that the NAS would be a seperate machine, not built from the same server i mentioned prior. It would just be connected to it via a switch and Ethernet, because the server would be doing routing. Also i'm planning on either a garage or closet with acoustic paneling And yeah, the irony of it all. Bulk storage has never been cheaper, but cases are designed for SSD/NVME now instead of spinning disks. Likely has something to do with the rotational rate of the platter, which could easily be retrieved from the target system and then the resonance solved for with a bit of math. Though in the 80's and 90's that would actually be pretty taxing....i'd imagine they'd use a lookup table or something similar instead of calculating directly. For a similar, but distinct modern example i'd advise you to look into StuxNet.

There's a couple of things that could also cause this. If you've OC'd your memory, an unstable OC can easily cause this. Outdated/Buggy Drivers for the graphics card can also cause issues, and faulty drives can also make the error come up. But because this error is fairly general (There's actually quite a lot that can make addresses in RAM not contain what a program expects/fail to load/not exist in the first place). There's not much anyone can really tell you to assist in diagnosing the issue further until you do more troubleshooting on your end I'm afraid. As for if it's a symptom of a larger issue with your PC, again....that's something you'd have to troubleshoot further. If it's resolved by a driver update/downgrade then likely no, but like i said previously it could also be a bad drive or unstable OC. But like i also said, there's just not enough information. Like what is your machine (The one that you're worried about, not the "Different" one)? I can't even really offer advice on how to troubleshoot because there's a huge difference between a laptop and desktop in that regard. What are your specs? If you have 32GB of RAM or something similar then you're likely correct in assuming it's not the issue and i wasted a entire paragraph of text. Did you try running a bone stock version of the game without mods and get the same error (If you did, and it did crash it would imply a driver issue heavily)? Does it only happen with KSP or other applications (If it's other applications, then you might need to start looking at the machine itself). Was it a KSP error or a blue screen? If it was a BSOD, then i'd suspect hardware more than software, but software is easier to troubleshoot and should be eliminated first regardless. I know this likely isn't what you wanted, but i really don't know what else to say.

Personally iv'e actually rather enjoyed it, because while yes at the end of the day you're still going to take a set of values and put them in a box expecting a single answer at the end....that's one of the core reasons this stuff has any utility. And unlike Algebra or Trigonometry I'm finally seeing some of the reasons why "insert name of function works the way it does", also derivatives and integration have been pretty fun for me. It's just the time commitment that's really been the drag, but that's life. And I'd say there's a lot you could teach differently from primary school all the way to the bachelor's level, but that's a very different discussion. They do, but only for the expected mission profile. I don't think anyone designing the Proton expected someone to literally hammer in gyroscopes backwards, making the rocket think it was boring thru the earth instead of ascending mid-flight. That's a good example of what KSP's "Floppy Joints" are supposed to be there for, but i get what you mean. They definitely need to improve how the Joints decide when to flex, because it is pretty much a guesstimate even with mods at this point.

Mhm Though if i recall there was a mod that allowed you to basically cover up some pins/capacitors and allow running 771 on 775, but that also requires modded BIOS or support in the BIOS. That machine in particular had a BTX board, and was a complete loss due to the fact none of it could actually fit standard components. It was well out of date at the time, so i wasn't too broken up about it. And yeah, LGA2011 coolers aren't hard to find by any stretch which was another of my main considerations. Also DDR3 is just....so much better...

DDR3, so E5 and 22nm. Man I shouldn't post after a night at work, but yeah it's a bargain. But I'm actually strangely familiar with socket 771, since it's similar to socket 775 that hosted the Pentium 4 in my childhood computer. And the crypto performance for VPN is what I'm after, so it looks like it may not be absolutely overkill after all from the latest comments. And I'll check out those supermicro boards. Also I was being sarcastic about the RPi xD I'd love to get one of them to play with one day, but that's basically what it would be xD.

Bummer, but I'd honestly recommend dealing with a crappy 10 dollar membrane walmart special for a while before you can get another one.

That's the sad part, i can find a dual xeon (v2 if I'm not mistaken, so 32nm) server with 16GB RAM, and PSU from a reliable "recycler" for 100 bucks shipped on ebay.... I literally cannot beat that price unless i go for something like a raspberry pi o.o But yeah, for a NAS i came to the same conclusion. I'll have to rig a ATX box up for what I'm after.

To answer your question, I'd honestly say go for a flat screen if possible. Curved really doesn't do anything unless you get to absurd widths and the arc pulls the otherwise wasted space outside your perf vision back in. But we're talking well over 32 inches.

Man, the saddest part is I'm thinking of picking up a similar server to use as a Pfsense router just because they're actually the cheapest thing i can find that has AES instructions and isn't absolute trash....but it's absolute overkill for the application at the same time. It'll be in a closet, so heat isn't too big of an issue. Power is dirt cheap here (2 cents/kwh last i checked), but i ammmmm going to be running a VPN and a gigabit pipe with it. Oh the things i tell myself to justify my obsession~ Unfortunately i couldn't find a similarly dirt cheap server that supports 3.5 inch disks, everything iv'e seen looks to be 2.5 and the cost per TB is miserable for laptop form-factor HDDs. What was this thread about? Something about power viruses causing actual hardware damage? i forgot xD

INB4 they have one of the garbage macbooks with one USB-C port.

Oh and somewhat back to the OP now, this post alone made me glad i stumbled upon this thread. Take your upvote you majestic *******. Literally made my night with this one.

My favorite is that they're all in different universes laughing at heat death. Even if there aren't parallel universes extent when they become a Type III civilization (Yes i know the K-scale isn't perfect, but i like it as a rough measure); the math still works (As far as we know; hehe). So all they do is create one, and let it cool while they chill in massive jupiter brains for billions of years. Then once the conditions are right, they bail out and repeat the process. An endless loop of recursive universes, and if we assume this civilization would be there from relatively early then anything that could evolve billions of years later wouldn't even have the privilege of seeing them. They'd already skip out to their next home, and any sentient life billions of years later would be none the wiser.

1MW = 1000kw, so one MW could power 40 dawns...300MW would be 12,000! I was mostly commenting on the absolutely abysmal energy/thrust ratio more than anything; ion drives don't produce much thrust (Isn't it in fractions of Kiloneutons?) but they use far less energy to achieve it. So i was mostly saying that if 1MW=1N for a potential "Reactionless" drive, and that's the limit not a likely achievable goal. Then you're better off just doing literally anything else with such mind boggling quantities of energy. Especially since current ion drives would be improved by being able to pump that much energy in them. Are we talking Solar Sails? Star Drives? Or using actual Laser beams as the propulsion? This is what i was trying to say, but rather crudely at the beginning. There's just no real justification for any potential propulsion method to not propose a model to explain itself that lies within conventional physics.