Jump to content

Corona688

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,992

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Corona688

  1. Corona688
    Is this talking about 1.1 or 1.2 wheels?
  2. Corona688
    How you got 'invisible at all times' from 'optional', I will never know.
  3. Corona688
    I don't entirely buy that. Ships are organized as trees too, and are more solid than docking ports.
  4. Corona688
    As a layered screenshot, perhaps, something they don't have to enable physics to show.
  5. Corona688
    The menu screen is already stripped-down as is to make it load faster... Those kerbals aren't really in orbit, and the kerbin behind them isn't even the same Kerbin model used in-game.
  6. Corona688
    How would you even tell? These asteroids are all so tiny the gravity is unnoticeable. Even the gravioli doesn't have the decimal places to show it.
  7. Corona688
    No need to be petulant. "This rarely-used debugging feature must be visible at all times to everyone because my building style in particular demands it!" Not really. If you can enable magically appearing struts with alt-F12, where it and other universe-altering debug stuff like like hyperedit warping and forced completion of contracts logically belong? It doesn't actually stop you from doing anything. Your intake-and-wheels christmas tree does nothing strange in 1.2 as far as I can tell. No bending. No wandering parts. No mysterious torques. Perhaps, as Squad hinted, that problem has been simply excluded -- no more same-ship collisions, period. And?
  8. Corona688
    I doubt anyone minds anyone using autostruts as band-aids for things which shouldn't actually be happening. I don't, anyway. But as a core part of the game? Why not in alt-F12?
  9. Corona688
    I asked for something which should be structurally sound and isn't, and this certainly fits the bill. It does so for different reasons than what we were discussing though -- colliders, rather than joints. Improving the joints again might help the deformations, but wouldn't treat the root of the problem. I think (but aren't 100% sure) that 1.2 banishes these same-craft collisions by just not processing them in the first place. Again, I'll have to check when I'm home. It's kind of relevant, if your suggestion for fixing them is to strengthen the joints again. If we've left that thread of conversation behind entirely, pardon me. Hell, I clip all the time. Anything that's not a moving or "active" part, like wings and girders, I clip the hell out of.
  10. Corona688
    As an option on building an airplane it doesn't make sense to me, as an alt-F12 debugging option it makes a lot of sense. Perhaps it could be preserved there?
  11. Corona688
    I'll have to view that later, but that sounds like a clipping issue, not a structural one. i.e. if things weren't colliding which shouldn't be, it'd be sound.
  12. Corona688
    Mostly means keeping the bug at the top of the queue by updating it. Note that I do not suggest or endorse pointless 'are we there yet' kind of bumps. Explanations, links, attachments of craft or saves or screenshots illustrating a problem, and other relevant information are helpfu, which is the limit of how we can really influence what they do.
  13. Corona688
    Show me an example of something which you'd expect to be structurally sound and isn't, please.
  14. Corona688
    The bug tracker is not a popularity contest, I don't have a lot to add to that except perhaps a link to this thread. Done.
  15. Corona688
    The explosion of mostly-useless right-click options in 1.2 makes it difficult to find the ones you need. Right now it's all-or-nothing, basic or advanced. You're...probably right. All I really want is a way to prevent that option appearing outside the VAB for me. I bet there's a way to change which options are considered 'advanced' by the game, I want a few advanced clickables but not all of them. I consider autostruts to be that structural design -- just as much as placing engines beneath tanks is. It tells which parts should be built literally as one hull. Whether the software achieves that with imaginary struts or a monocoque skin-part, whatever. Which is why toggling outside the VAB feels wrong to me, there's no button on an airplane to make its skin dismantle and remantle itself.
  16. Corona688
    In what sense are they keyed, then? Just shapes that look wrong if you don't line them up?
  17. Corona688
    Yes and no... What's 3 parts now, was a stacked hexagon of junk at the time - no 2.5m stuff. This meant really huge wacky designs for anything beyond your basic 1-man orbit goer, struts all but mandatory. When 2.5m stuff was added, it more clearly illustrated the limitations of Unity joints and got fixed eventually. I've finally remembered some simple situations where struts are still useful in modern KSP, like SRB's on radial decouplers. Those are still floppy and rightly so, building them without bracing struts is structurally unsound. It's really nice to have a way to strap them down.
  18. Corona688
    Essentially, industrial-strength docking clamps for orbital construction. They'd differ from docking ports in a few key ways: Keyed - Square or hex shapes which only match at a few fixed angles. Rigid - it ought to have strength equivalent to a joint made at the VAB. Semi-Permanent - No 'undock' button. At best, possible with EVA. They might even be asymmetric, with plug and socket parts. Are there any modded parts like this?
  19. Corona688
    I mean, there was jitter I didn't realize was there until it was gone, the happens-to-everything jitter you get accustomed to with any MIcrosoft OS. That was noticeably better, probably due to 1.2's improved multithreading. The prerelease is out already, you know.
  20. Corona688
    I disagree that joints are too weak and floppy, they've improved and strengthened them again and again - sometimes close to the point of absurdity. I haven't needed to use struts lately for anything but aesthetic reasons, and in the past when I have, it's because I was building obviously elongated or noodly things. The strut part is useful, I think, just because there should be some cost to building ridiculously floppy designs, but you should be able to do so if you really want. Back on topic, I agree autostruts should be a VAB thing. Basically you're telling it "This should be one giant part, not a taped-together noodle of 17" and changing that on the fly makes no sense. Perhaps there should be some cost to being autostrutted -- it acts way stronger, but if per chance some part of it DOES break, so should the autostruts, maybe even a part it's strutted to. Rigidity is always a tradeoff with brittleness IRL. Also, it's really distracting to have it in the right-click menu. We got so many more right-click options in 1.2, few of them actually useful.
  21. Corona688
    Multithreading isn't a matter of pushing the go-faster button, dividing a problem into threads means redesigning the program. Which they've done in 1.2.
  22. Corona688
    I love that SSTO biplane. 1.2 is amazingly smooth. I don't build as large as you, but a lot of the jitter we've come accustomed to as normal in 1.1 just isn't there. It's so nice I'm sticking to it even though it means giving up Kerbal Alarm Clock.
  23. Corona688
    @RoboRay Would you mind mentioning what they are? Don't hold out on us
  24. Corona688
    Is that a graphical glitch, an interesting paint job, or the aftermath of a really hellacious aerobraking?
  25. Corona688
    Followed the KSC Beacon down to a perfectly on-target and horrible landing because SOMETHING MOVED THE FLAG!
×
×
  • Create New...