hoojiwana

Stockalike 0.9 is now available on Spaceport, sorry for the length of time it took to get the few parts released. I liked the bird theme, so it's ended up as the TtH-2B "Kingfisher" Liquid Engine. I would love to do one, consider it on the list for the next update. If people like the Kingfisher aesthetic I may make this prospective new engine in the same vein as that. As Ralathon said, they'd be hard to balance. I'm not terribly keen on the science system as it stands right now either, so don't expect anything related to it outside of basic compatibility. Electric Engines has some very old parts in it now, the Arcjet design was 4th or 5th thing I ever modelled and textured and I think it shows! The Xenon tanks will also be updated, though I've not settled on a new design for them just yet, I do love the exposed look to them though. When that update comes out it will be a full replacement, with no compatibility with the current release. Any craft that uses those parts is likely to end up breaking. I would like to but I don't want to contribute to the proliferation of mod trees and potential mod incompatibilities that the current terrible tech tree design leads to. I love the idea and looked into altering the models for some of the engines and it should be pretty easy to do so without having to completely redo the textures. I didn't want to delay 0.9 any further than I already have so proper engine bells will be something extra sometime soon. I know full well how they should look but what with following the stock aesthetic I'm a little confined in what I can get away with. What I'm going to do is have a second version of the applicable engines with the same stats, but the models and textures will be there to be used for RSS/MFS. The Strut, Fuel Pipe and Launch Clamp all end up looking huge on 0.625m rockets, so I may make alternative versions to use.

This will be the lineup of 0.625m rockets in the next Stockalike version, from left to right: Rockomax "Spinnaker" Liquid Engine - High TWR, Low ISP Unnamed Liquid Engine - Mid TWR, Mid ISP LV-T5 Liquid Engine - Low TWR, High ISP LV-Nc Atomic Rocket Motor - Very low TWR, Very high ISP MPR-5 Monopropellent Engine - Low TWR, uses Monopropellent The Spinnaker needs a few texture adjustments to bring it up on par with the blue engine, so don't treat this preview as the final product! The LV-T5 will also have its stats adjusted, and its part name changed to RLA_s_lowengine (in a folder of the same name). That means that any craft that has the released version of the LV-T5 will likely end up with the blue engine clipped awkwardly into it or floating or something, this is easily fixed in the VAB/SPH but any launched craft may experience spontaneous disassembly. If you want to avoid this, I suggest backing up your save and altering the LV-T5 part name now so you can prepare your craft files for the switch.

It's a good job the stock ion engine only needs 1 Gigantor at Kerbin to run at full throttle, and 2 Gigantors way out at Jool then isn't it?

If you mean generating ElectricCharge then it's intended that only the LV-T5 creates any. That will change with the next update. New engines you say?

Which ones exactly?

Another part update is available, though not quite as expansive as the last. Here is it on Spaceport. Just a few probe scale structural parts like those adapters suggested a few pages back, and some tiny monopropellent tanks. I also reduced the Radial Jet texture to be 512x512, and removed the bad normal map it had. Overall that means the whole thing is actually the same size if not slightly smaller than 0.7 was.

Why are you showcasing parts that are scrapped exactly?

Developers intentionally not explaining gameplay concepts through the game itself and relying on the community to do it for them is incredibly lazy and downright unprofessional.

The direction that Squad seems to be taking KSP in is a bit of an odd one. 0.22 and career is supposedly a way to help ease new players into the game without confusing them, and yet there is zero explanation of the new science system in game. Nothing at all. A new player is just supposed to stumble through the game with nothing mentioning you can actually right click your Kerbals to do science and plant flags, or that biomes are actually a thing. To a new player KSP is just as hostile as it ever was, and for experienced players there is what, stock subassemblies? Certainly not the tech tree as explained by HarvesteR on a number of occasions. The game is undergoing a bit of an identity crisis, the developers don't quite seem to know what they want to do with it. It is a game with a funny (if childish) tone combined with simplified rocketry and orbital mechanics, and seems to be veering towards those that prefer the wacky nature of the game very strongly. Who is the game currently being marketed at? Who is the audience based on gameplay principles? I wouldn't say they were the same, and Squad seems to be alienating a vocal portion of their fanbase. So yes I think they are ditching the "hardcore" players, and even those that don't quite want realism but like the game as it is.

I love the enthusiasm! If you want to help simply provide constructive feedback on Electric Engines parts and potential new art styles, and on part ideas for Stockalike. Though I have plenty of ideas and things to make already! I've started work on the next update for that as well, here's a quick little picture; A slight texture update to the 0.625m radial stack extender, and a 0.625m radial attachment point. Sure you can use Cubic Octags, but they look ugly and have no mass so are a bit cheaty. The radial attachment point doesn't use any new textures at all, it is the exact same area on the existing texture for the stack extender, so that's why it might look a little odd in some places. A great way to save memory usage! EDIT: Posted at nearly the same time as the poster below, but it's a point I should make. If you add or alter any parts that are assigned to a tech node you already have unlocked, you will need to head into the R&D UI and "purchase" the parts from the tech node. You should see the parts with a cost in the preview window on the right after selecting the appropriate node. This happens because of a partly implemented system for part purchasing.

Everything should be updated to be compatible with the tech tree, enjoy!

I believe that is the collider for the foot, since that particular one orients itself to face the ground. Don't quote me on that, I'm not 100% sure.

So this might be handy.

You're totally free to rescale them to something that looks more appropriate. Filling up all that space was a challenge and I don't think I did a very good job of it! 360x360 with Kerbal scale is an awful lot of space.

I did exactly that. The scale of the buildings is correct against a Kerbal, but the buildings themselves are absolutely huge. Kerbals gotta have somewhere to live, so I made housing for an awful lot of them. If I do another plot somewhere it definitely won't be anywhere near the 360x360 size of this first one.

I'm anxious to see how well what I sent you has worked out.

Nope, same way of making them. Are you calling the right animation name in the config?

A simple way to prevent forum posts being taken down by lack of a license is to have a license. There's a good guide you can read through here. It also helps to get people interested if you have something to show like a work in progress screenshot or something.

It's an idea certainly. Kommitz has started doing a Stockalike structural set, you should suggest this to him as well. Arcjets use the exact same amount of power as every other engine type, unless you're using more of them to get the same amount of thrust as resistojets. They're sat halfway between the Ions and Resistos in terms of ISP and thrust, but not power requirements. I have some ideas for tiny radial monopropellent tanks, so they might help out for probes. I'm not sold on the idea of even larger inline tanks since the engines are not intended to be used as main propulsion, that's what LFO (or possibly electric) engines are for. You're always going to get odd results with a tiny fuel tank though. But still, point taken. Balance against the 48-7S is incredibly difficult to achieve, I have an idea about how to avoid needing to do it in the future. The ISP of the MP rockets cannot be directly compared to the LFO ones because it doesn't use a fuel mixture, the MP tanks have different wet/dry mass ratios, and they're not supposed to be used as an LFO replacement. I like this idea, and adding bi/tri/quad adapters would make sense for Stockalike. It might be a bit finnicky with having those adapters on decouplers, but I guess that's already an issue with engine clusters. There is also the issue of part count I suppose, but if I made a cluster of engines for all possible things a player might make, there would just be part bloat in the pack. Solution is possibly a combination of the adapters and 1.25m engines that are more interesting than clusters, if power isn't too big of a concern. Look great, and thanks for the feedback! Yes. Expect everything to be made compatible with career mode as soon as I can actually sort out new versions after 0.22 is released. Still not sure exactly what I'll work on first in terms of new/updated parts, but I still have bits I would like to add to Stockalike I could do, and that idea about avoiding balancing against the 48-7S.

You actually got the particles working on the engine?

I poked through my files and found the original files for the 0.20 Part Tools. Mirror download here, PM me if it breaks or something since it's hosted on my Dropbox. Hopefully a more official link will appear soon.

That is one nice looking paint job!

That exhaust effect is roughly the same size as the RCS one. Not that it matters since you can't actually chance the RCS effect anyway, which I probably should've mentioned in my previous answer! Looks great! How do you like the LV-Nc? Exactly this, the engines actually end up withmore dV than their ISP suggests. I also had a number of requests to make some monopropellent engines, and there are real-world examples of them. I even made a Viking-style lander to test the radial ones out, since the real thing used monopropellent engines. The skycrane that dropped off Curiosity used engines derived from those that Viking used as well. Fun fact; the Atomic in Roemy-Lemdum Atomics is there because I originally wanted to make all those crazy nuclear engines that are on that list. Quite how I ended up doing Electric Engines and stockalike parts I'm not sure! As for making a modal NERVA, such a thing would need a plugin and I'm sure you're all aware that I don't wish to add any dependencies to my releases. The LV-T5 has slightly higher ISP than the 48-7S, but you're bang on with the 48-7S being OP. Balancing anything against that is a huge challenge, if I make the engine too good it becomes OP in itself, but if it's too weak there's no point in using it. That's why it has the alternator to make it slightly more attractive, and I prefer having an engine be underpowered rather than overpowered. Not sure about adding larger monopropellent tanks, the engines are not intended to be used as primary propulsion methods, they are there for one-way landers and short journey vessels. If you do need more there is always the 2.5m inline tank, that has the best wet-to-dry mass ratio as well. Speaking of mass ratios, the Oscar-B and Toroidal tank are far out of line with the larger stock tanks which are all 11.11% dry mass. The FS-Lx tanks are all on, or just slightly over, the same dry mass ratio as the larger tanks. They are essentially better than stock parts for that reason. I hear you, but I'm also keen to prune the pack of those parts that are underutilised. How often do you use the Arcjets, the radial engines (all varieties) and the 1.25m clusters (all varieties)? What about the Xenon tank sizes, is there one size you never use?

If every mod created it's own unique tech nodes that just massively inflates the science requirements to unlock everything.

Oh wow that's a lot of positive feedback! I love that you all love my work! The little RCS blocks use the same size effect as the full size one simply because that's the only option I have available. Until there is an easy way to change the size of the particle effect, or even create my own, the little RCS will be stuck with the huge-by-comparison effect. Not much I can do about that I'm afraid! On the topic of VASIMR/MPDs, they are barely in the concept stage at the moment. I've got plans for a full overhaul of the Electric Engines pack to bring the artwork in line with Stockalike 0.7 quality, as well as a change in the aim of the pack in general. Many parts will be gone, and there will be new parts to play with. I do need some feedback on how people use the pack as it stand right now though to help me! Mainly on how often people use the different sizes and types of engines. Many people mention how useful the Resistojets are, and those are definitely staying. But the small radial engines and all sizes of Arcjets I'm not sure about. So tell me what you use the most, and what you think just clutters up the place. Before that update comes out though, there will be a long-overdue addition of solar panels to Power Generation, as well as perhaps more things for Stockalike.