Eric S
-
Posts
1,589 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Eric S
-
-
Sounds like a good idea to me.
-
Nobody's shown how the fairings work interstage
Not in detail, but someone (Das?) did how basically how it would work. In addition to closing a fairing in a point at the top, you can close it on the outside of a part, so it can work as an interstage fairing, it's just the minor details we don't know.
-
To bad they couldn't delay 1.0 until is was 1.0 ready.
There will always be something else that someone feels that 1.0 should have. From what I've seen so far, the game is good enough to be called 1.0.
-
A long time ago, they hinted that option #2 was going to be one of the uses of tweakables. And no, I don't think that we need the ability to arbitrarily change them (so no big orange xenon tanks, for example), but having nuclear engines that only use LF and no big LF tanks is going to make me either mod in large LF tanks nor not bother with more ambitious missions, leading me to move on to something else sooner.
-
Yes. We know that they were likely to be delayed. And now that we see no indication of them in the game on the streams and vids, it's safe to say that they're not "likely" delayed, but actually delayed.
True. They've been hinting that the delta-v indicator would be delayed ever since they clarified the "more features or more polish" poll, that readout was specifically cited as something that would probably get bumped if they focused on polish, and I'm pretty sure someone said that it was almost definitely delayed a week or two ago.
-
I'll agree with "as long as it's balanced" and it certainly looks more balanced than Kethane was. That converter is not small, and it probably isn't light either.
-
This is so dumb! They couldn't even give us the option to do it right? With everything they've gotten right with 1.0, how in the world could they have screwed this feature up?
Harvester was in chat when Das was showing this, and he said that the intent was for clamshell-style ejection, but he didn't have enough time to do that for 1.0, so I'd expect it in 1.1, 1.0.1, or whatever patch version comes next.
-
I've got an imgur album that documents an old super hard challenge mode I did a long time ago. Pictures 8-10 are probably the best pictures to give you an idea of the return craft. The delta-v budget was rather tight, but getting rid of the heat shield would probably fix that and let you get away with a lighter launch stage as well. Be aware that the fuel tank was full as it was sitting on Duna.
-
I pretty much stopped playing KSP about 2 months ago in anticipation for 1.0... so yeah, I'll be updating on monday to mess around with the new stock game.
Same here. 1.0 fixes far too many of my nitpicks, and potentially even fixes a bug that made me ragequit a career mode back at the start of my KSP break.
-
Am I missing anything?
The 1.5m xenon tank? One or more fuel cells. The RT-5 SRB. Even estimating high, that leaves us far short of 75 parts. Interesting.
EDIT: Source for the 38 count? I haven't seen that yet. Sadly, that's slightly lower than my high estimate for what parts we know about.
EDIT2: OK, see it now.
-
How can something infinite be relative?
He didn't say infinite, he said finite. This was the approach taken in the mod that added asteroid resources to Karbonite. Planets had infinite resources, asteroids had a capped amount based on their size. RoverDude implemented both Karbonite and the stock resources stuff coming in 1.0, so while it's possible that asteroids may not be handled the same way, they're at least aware of the issue.
-
BTW, does this means that there will be no Squadcast tonight ? :/
This was announced before Maxmaps said he may or may not have time for Squadcast tonght. I hope there is one, but last I had seen he hadn't confirmed one way or the other.
-
I'm not sure what version of Unity 4 KSP is currently running on. As for whether or not the devs are changing to Unity 5, Unity 5 came out after the KSP 1.0 dev cycle was well under way, so it was too late to switch to U5. The devs have stated that they're excited for the possibilities that U5 bring, and that they will be evaluating the feasibility of switching to U5 as soon as 1.0 comes out (to be clear, the evaluation will happen after 1.0 comes out, the timeline of a U5 port would depend on that evaluation). While many games have already switched over to Unity 5 and some have taken very little effort, most of the games where the devs have reported problems converting to Unity 5 have more in common with KSP than those that had an easy time, so I suspect KSP may fall into the category of games that didn't/won't have a smooth transition.
-
Even if there is ZERO improvement over the current version (and as long as it doesn't make it WORSE), That is totally worth it for the mods you'll be able to run. I'm dying for that as the next, major update
While I'll agree that I want to see a U5 version of KSP, i'm not sure I understand your point. I think you're assuming that U5 has fixed win64 sufficiently that Squad can offer a Win64 version of KSP again. I suspect that you're right, but it isn't a given, and probably won't be as necessary given the fixes coming in KSP 1.0.
-
Since the devs have stated that they want to stay away from Steam Workshop, I don't see this being an issue in the near future. Farther out, possibly.
-
What are the advantages to mounting it on ISS vs. a freestanding satellite? All I see so far is perhaps ISS has surplus electrical power. But solar cells aren't that expensive, while mounting it on ISS will require EVAs, won't it?
The thing to keep in mind is that this is a test of the system, and if they need to fix or upgrade hardware, that may be easier at the ISS than launching a whole new satellite, depending on the nature of the work.
-
Having done exactly this (designing craft in an install with KER and then moving the craft file over to a strictly stock game install) I can tell you that it at least worked in earlier versions of KSP.
-
Yet by all appearances it's only getting fixed because it embarassed Maxmaps during the last squadcast. Maybe he should play the game more?
Given that Max said that he thought that that bug was fixed during that same Squadcast, I think you're off base there.
The bug has a known fix, which can be downloaded as a "mod," and is a very small file.The bug "fix", if it's the one I know of, works by eliminating the ejection force of the radial decouplers. An actual fix would involve more than that.
-
Are these fairing gonna leave a load of debris? Might cause some lag. I should remember to separate them before I get into orbit.
As I understand it, the debris vanishes on reload or when they drift outside the physics bubble.
-
Right being a part of a herd of sheep led to the slaughter by the experts is my dream.
The problem is that a lot of people with that attitude wouldn't know an informed opinion from "Hey, I just had an idea." If an expert's opinion differs from mine on something I consider important, I investigate as to why the opinions differ. Following the opinion of an expert just because they're an expert may be bad, but it's better than disregarding the opinion of an expert just because you aren't aware of your level of ignorance on the subject. Which is not to say that's the case with you.
In a perfect world, everyone would have both the basic understanding of the relevant field and enough understanding of critical thinking to be able to evaluate the claims being put forth. I think I'd like living in that world better than this one if for no other reason than I probably would have found the educational system far more interesting, because this one is definitely not that one.
-
Yeah I wouldnt care if there was no clouds in battlefield or anyother game clouds dont effect the gameplay I dont interact with the clouds and frankly aesthetics will never be that important to me. give me a real gameplay feature not some white puffs in a skybox I dont care about.
I very much doubt that it would be anything involving game mechanics at this point, as they'd be pressed for time to balance it, or at the very least test it to make sure it doesn't cause problems. This rules life support out right away, and is a big strike against giving terrain scatter a collision mesh. On the flip side of this, he says he spent a few days implementing it. Past tense. So if it's minor enough, that's almost a week to playtest it.
I think it's going to be something UI, or strictly visual. And yes, as much as I'm a function over visuals kind of person, I played with a mod that added clouds once and was quite surprised by how much that one change made the game feel more real. I would not be disappointed if it is clouds, but I won't be disappointed if it's not clouds. If they've improved the memory consumption and handling as much as they seem to have, then I don't mind getting clouds from a mod.
-
To be honest, I don't think it's time to worry about DLC yet. The devs have stated that they intend to continue working on KSP, though not for an indefinite amount of time. I'd expect at the very least that we'll get multiplayer and Unity 5 before they start working on DLC. Hopefully, if the fairings are in fact breaking into lots of little pieces, we'll get an option to set them to something more normal. And that's just what I consider important, the devs have their own list of things that they want to add to KSP before calling it done.
-
It makes me wonder if the dev team's understanding of how people play the game is skewed by Max's play style. OR, if Max's play style is a reflection of the dev team's idea of how the game is supposed to be played.
Maxmaps has talked about Harvester razzing him about how he plays, so I'm pretty sure that there's not much connection there.
-
What interests me more is how many parts it will be during launch, when it still has to be "of substance".
Harvester confirmed that it's one piece while still attached to the rocket.
Ore drilling/fuel refining in 1.0 : a built-in cheat, or not a cheat?
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
We're not talking about drilling for oil and then refining it either. I'm guessing you've never googled for "nasa isru" for that matter, since the NASA website does talk about it. Yes, there's more research to be done, but the basic theory is solid, and doesn't involve anything on the scale you're talking about.