tsakali

this..... honestly, anything with lyrics I find inappropriate.

Aye, whatever they are called, I get your point...a base panel won't have to be simulated at all! But I still hope both base and space station creation will be just as open to innovation as the rockets are.

oh ****, this thing uses Unity? that explains a big part of it but ok, I'll go against my logic and take your word on the possibility of improvement on such a fundamental aspect. And I guess, any aspect of base intended parts, won't have to be "soft" bodies as you call them so that in itself sounds like good news.

Hello fellow ksp'ers! I'm here to voice a concern for the future as well as maybe find some answers that may or may have not been dealt with here before. As I was in the process of concentrating a few landers on one small area on the mun by trying to simulate some type of munar base, each following landing became progressively choppier , until I got to my 6th lander which gave me about 1 frames per second hence was impossible to complete, no matter how low I set my graphics quality settings. My system is a quad 3.2 ghz cpu with a 9800GTX video card and 8gigs of ram so it's not a push over by any means. I'm guessing, the presence of all the already stationed landings in that location made processing the environment virtually impossible. These landers are not extravagant in design by all means... they actually composed of a capsule, 4 tanks and landing engines, an advanced sas, 4 maneuvering rsc, an 4 landing feet. (?). What really gets me is that even when all the other landers are not in my field of view, it seems that they are still being rendered since no matter where I turned the camera it had no effect in the choppiness. Now I know I have seen massively more complicated scenes on other video games that can handle alot more, and I also understand that this is basically not a finished game yet, but I'm thinking that the rendering engine is not something that is easily developed, nor easily edited. SO I'm willing to guess that the game's current development point should really not be taken under consideration when talking about the capabilities of the rendering engine that is implemented here. Or am I wrong? is this an issue that is known and will be addressed in the future? How will this game cope with it's expansion, of capabilities? How can we even dream about creating munar bases without first taking a serious look at the rendering limitations of this game? No flames please, this is not a troll, I really enjoy this game, but I have genuine concern that this will greatly limit the possibilities of enjoying a richer kerbiverse.

also, as for people getting it done without looking and no instrumentation, I'm guessing it's just a matter of repetition and basically going through the passes...which in my opinion, is not very impressive considering one has to have done it before, with a map and basically regurgitate the required steps. Sorry, I would have edited my above post, but I'm still not a trusted member of the community. DAMN YOU bad apples!

Hey, thanx for all the replies. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the KSP, and even if the map makes it somewhat straight forward, I still appreciate the overall knowledge I gained from understanding the principles of physics that go into it. Anyway, I guess it's logical to imagine that with out any landmarks on the way with such huge distances in question , it's really not a surprise that we need to depend on automated computations. I wonder how they originally went about doing these things IRL.

So I've been using the map to check up on my trajectories etc. and after getting the hang of it, it all seems pretty easy. Is there a way I can do this without looking at the map? Are there information i can use that will allow me to try and do it without the map, for a little more challenge or is that crazy talk? If there is, some guidance to the right info and gadgets would be appreciated!

thx will give it a go !

hey thx for the quick reply. Yeah I've been searching through it, but some of the named mods (with no links, or good links provided) I can't even google as a workaround because of the broken links. Anyway, atleast it's not me, phew.

Hello, new here, and trying to get some addons! What gives with all the links not working? post a link, I bet it doesn't work. Unless it me, omg is it me? what does it mean!?#%@