whatsEJstandfor
-
Posts
532 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by whatsEJstandfor
-
-
1 hour ago, Ghostii_Space said:
Having the launcher stay open tends to affect computer performance
I would have thought that the launcher is literally just a window with a button that acts as a shortcut to the KSP2 executable. What is it doing that could possibly affect performance? And why does it spawn like 10 processes?*
*These are rhetorical; I know you and Intercept don't have any say in this stuff. I'm just venting; this is all just extraordinarily stupid to me -
• My kingdom for a built-in transfer window planner. Gimme them porkchops
• Either disallow staging while time warping or give some kind of feedback that it happened. When time warping, hitting the space bar doesn't appear to do anything, but when going back to real-time, the next stage will immediately go. This has boned me a couple times when I've been time warping, tried to stage, thought it didn't work, hit the space bar again, realized I was time warping, slowed back to 1x speed, and I've now activated two stages• Dunno if this is covered in the tutorials, but I would love detailed explanations of exactly what each camera view does. Usually, I just hit V and cycle through until I find one that doesn't make me vomit depending on whatever situation I'm in
-
1 hour ago, Nuke said:
a game thats trying to get kids into stem should probibly have appropriate units. but then again its not an electronics simulator. i think id put it in terms of watt-hours however, because that is agnostic of the voltages and currents actually used. its also easy to figure out how much power you need for something, if say their power requirements are in watts.
But amp hours is the correct unit of electric charge. Since it's (C/s)*3600s, an amp hour is 3600 coulombs. Idk which one is more intuitive for a normie, whether it's energy in terms of joules or charge in terms of coulombs, but I think semi-tech-literate people are already used to batteries being in Ah.
-
I see this icon on engines and, as far as I can tell, clicking it does nothing. Anyone have any intel on this doodad? -
I've been playing around with the stock Kerbal-K2 vehicle because I thought that the vehicles I had been making were broken because of something I had done, but I've now had several weird bugs occur with this built-in one as well. I've submitted these through the PD launcher, but I wondered if anyone else has encountered them.
First, and this seems to happen even if I revert to VAB, to launch, or restart the game, the upper stage sticks to the core stage's decoupler if the upper stage's engine and the decoupler are in the same stage. In other words, once the core stage is spent, and I try to stage it, the engine cover falls off and the twin engines fire, but the core stage is still stuck to the rest of the vessel, as if the decoupler didn't decouple. I've found that if I place the decoupler in its own stage just before the upper stage's engines fire, everything seems fine. Likewise if I decouple it from the Parts Mangler before firing the upper stage.
Spoiler
This one is bizarre and took a lot of trial and error to track down, but it seems to be repeatable. If I load the Kerbal-K2 into the VAB, and do nothing to it but add four landing legs to the upper stage, the fuel flow breaks. After launch, it will appear normal, but right after the first staging event, the core stage engine starts pulling fuel from the upper stage's tank. In the screenshots, note how the core stage's engine has 9.6t total fuel available to it just before staging. And then, right after staging, that suddenly jumps to 12t. And, if we wait for the core stage to expend all its fuel, we'll find that the upper stage (which can hold 2.4t) is now empty.
Spoiler
Also, and this one is probably unrelated to the Kerbal-K2, but my camera now defaults to Orbital whenever I send a vehicle to the pad or runway. I have to hit V a bunch of times to get it back to Auto: Ground. I thought maybe I had borked a setting somewhere, but couldn't find anything in the settings that would cause that.
-
Devs, please implement this fix or I will be requesting a refund post-haste
-
This would also be a great learning opportunity in general, to help players get an intuitive feel for what changing a wing's characteristics does to the craft
-
If a home user is part of a domain and has a roaming profile, I'd assume that whoever set that up for them is a close family member and turbonerd and would be able to find a way to redirect the KSP save folder to a network location as well
-
1 minute ago, FishInferno said:
Gotcha, thanks! Hopefully they'll add flaps eventually.
idk, KSP1 didn't have flaps, and I think having them might be overkill even for KSP2. That would add a level of complexity that, tbh, I don't think would actually add any fun or function to the game. That kind of stuff is way more suited for a dedicated realistic flight sim
-
1 hour ago, LameLefty said:
Speaking of maneuver nodes - it's been a couple years since I played KSP1 intensively, so maybe this was a Debug menu option I enabled or something, but how come when I set up an encounter with a moon or planetary body, I don't see the trajectory as it will appear at that body, complete with the expected periapsis? I get these odd little target graphics (which seem to serve no real purpose except for "wow" factor for new players maybe) but I don't see any way to see my planned trajectory around that body.
If you mean that you're seeing where you're predicted to enter and exit the SOI, but don't see the trajectory within that SOI, my understand (per @ShadowZone's latest video) is that this is one of the priority fixes coming up.
-
This doesn't much apply to you, but if anyone else is in a similar boat, here's an anecdote. My CPU and RAM are far beyond the minimum, but I wanted to try an experiment since my RX 5700 was sort of struggling at 1080p high. I change my resolution to 1600x900 and set the Low preset. About an hour into gameplay, I had forgotten I had changed it. There was definitely some aliasing, but the framerate was solid for the most part and the game was still beautiful. I'd suggest giving 1600x900 on Low a shot if you're at or below the minimum.
-
16 minutes ago, FishInferno said:
Hello, I don't have an answer but I do have a question related to wing construction. I haven't bought KSP 2 yet and am curious.
Are we able to adjust the size of control surfaces? (Not the all-moving ones, the integrated flaps in wings.) I've seen many posts of planes with comically large ailerons.
Yes, you can adjust the control surfaces separately from the body of the wing. As far as I can tell, each wing can have, at most, one control surface, so it's not like you'll be putting flaps or slats or spoilers on them
-
I didn't realize it until you said it, but 1000% I agree.
-
What are your specs? If your PC crashed, this kind of sounds like faulty memory. You may want to try running Memtest86+
-
1 hour ago, DwightLee said:
Ok coming back from Mun landing and there is something we need.
There need to be an easy way to see how full an attached tank is.
It may just be my own misunderstanding but it would help if in the parts manager when you have a tank selected you could see how much fuel is currently in it. That way it would be easier to know when we can drop that tank.
Thanks in advance
I think this is what you're looking for: click the little blue arrow next to the staging button. It will show fuel and dV remaining in each stage and tank.
-
17 minutes ago, lajoswinkler said:
Sadly, we still have The Mun instead of Mün.
Seriously, I feel like I'm the only one who still pronounces it "Mün". I always forget it's no longer spelled that way canonically anymore. It's like that spelling was suddenly abandoned at some point and everyone just started pronouncing it boringly
-
9 minutes ago, fragtzack said:
The dev teams needs to focus on basics and not the long term goals of interstellar, colonies, multiple systems, etc.
tbh I think that's literally one of the goals of EA; to validate what works and what doesn't in the base game before committing to building colonies/interstellar/etc on top of it.
-
Due to many errors (some mine, some the game's), Bob was tragically stranded in LKO in a command pod with no dV. Needing a rescue mission fast, Val volunteered (valunteered?) to fly a stock Kerbal-K2 to rendezvous with Bob, extract him from his command pod, and return safely back to Kerbin.
It took Val a while to figure out the new maneuver planning, especially since she couldn't see target intercept distances while adjusting the maneuver nodes. However, after a few Kerbin orbits, she got close enough to Bob's cold, dark capsule for him to jump out and spacewalk to Val's.
They rode down together into the sunset, only missing the KSC by a hair's breadth*
*in interplanetary terms, anyway -
I'm going to see if I can possibly get this to run on a laptop I bought from a dude in a trailer for $100 about 5 years ago. It was already about 7 years old at the time, and I now run the Xfce-flavored version of Linux Mint on it because Cinnamon was too taxing lmao
Update: It will not even install rofl -
This is subjective, but I really, really like it. It's not like I look to the navball as a precision heading indicator. I can still read it regardless but, even if I couldn't, I kind of like aesthetic over practicality for the navball anyway.
-
Saw this posted over in the Steam discussion page by @Nerdy_Mike, but didn't see it crossposted here:
I don't know if any of us doubted that the devs were eagerly watching how this first day went and taking all this feedback seriously, but this is at least confirmation. I can't say I'm not bummed that the first patch is weeks away rather than, you know, tomorrow, but that's definitely a me problem. Devs, I hope you get some nice rest and shake off any feedback that isn't constructive. We all take this game seriously, but it is, after all, only a game, and I hope the vitriol by some of the community won't linger on you. -
It may be that real-world rockets aren't fully rigid, but you also don't see struts holding the boosters to the upper stage of SLS, or struts holding the Apollo CSM to the core stage of the Saturn V. Currently (and in KSP1 without struts or autostrut), joints between parts feel like they're made of thick rubber instead of welded steel. If wobbly rockets, at least with the properties that they have now, are legitimately a design choice, I just disagree with it. It's one of the charming things about KSP at first, but I think it's antithetical to the usual mid-game goal of building big-ass crafts
-
1 minute ago, Lorunification said:
I am only joking, but hear me out. You could run something like https://github.com/fathyb/carbonyl and connect a remote client to a cloud gaming service of your choosing (e.g. CloudMorph), then connect to that client via SSH and render the game on essentially any machine that is capable of displaying a terminal. You would still need a GPU to initially render the game though.
Child's play. Get back to me once it's being rendered over a teletype.
-
The music (and audio in general), the tutorials, and the general ambience. So very good. Despite the bugs, I love love love love where vehicle assembly is heading, and I know that, with some more polish, it will be exactly what I was hoping for. I feel like the bones are very much there, and I hope that today has been extremely fruitful in tracking down edge cases and bugs
Protip: The Stock RC Sparrow Is Upside-Down!
in v0.1.0
Posted
Boy howdy, this one took me so long to troubleshoot. I was having such a hard time getting the RC Sparrow to take off. Before I could reach a takeoff airspeed, I'd spin out of control and crash. Eventually I noticed that the controls were inverted; hitting S pulled the elevators down, and hitting W pulled them up. Not only that, but hitting A would make me yaw to starboard, and D would yaw to port. I thought that maybe the COL was in front of the COM or something, but after fiddling with wing placement and checking to see if the Invert Controls option for those wings were enabled, I couldn't figure this one out.
After some more troubleshooting*, I found that the g*sh d*ng probe core is flipped around. If you remove the probe core, and use Q or E to rotate it 180 degrees, and put it back on, the controls become what you'd expect. It's still hard to takeoff, but not impossible like it was before, and I found that lowering the friction of the wheels definitely helps.
*Pictured: troubleshooting