CaptainKipard

Umm. That doesn't really help sorry. I was really tired when I asked for that. I don't know what I was thinking. Do you have an animation applied to any of the objects in that hierarchy? Also why is there a space in "Je t.mu"?

In Unity there's a panel called Hierarchy with your objects in a hierarchy.

Show your hierarchy

You can add new edge loops by using the loop cut tool (Ctrl+R), but if it's something that's meant to be round I'd just recreate the mesh the way PB666 said

output_log.txt in KSP_Data

Kasper said not to criticise testers, not Squad. Squad are absolutely fair game.

UpsilonAerospace I can't make heads or tails of the actual content of your points 1 and 2. 1. Is this just a long-winded way of saying "the past is the past"? When has that ever been a convincing argument? The moment you do anything it's already in the past. So what? 2. This whole point is a bit of a strawman and a red herring. I can't honestly believe you think anyone in this community ACTUALLY BELIEVES SQUAD ARE SABOTAGING THEIR OWN PRODUCT. Come on... As for Squad doing what's best for KSP, well it's not that simple. Squad are a capitalist organisation (otherwise known as a business) and as such they are doing what they think is best for Squad, not KSP. KSP being good or bad is just a vehicle for that, as is our enjoyment of the "finished" product. Which brings us back to point 1. Now if you think that a game has to be good for large masses to buy it then you've not been paying attention to the game market in recent years. Many studios that I would consider reputable a few years ago now put out unfinished garbage, lackluster DLC or pay-to-win nonsense, which should tell you just one thing. Gamers will buy ANYTHING. I've heard some commentators say that another game market crash is approaching because of this over-saturation. I kinda care about Squad and I'd like them to survive, which is why I've been critical. It's a good thing. KSP being the first game of it's kind deserves better. As consumers we have every right to express our experience. That's what a free market is. You buy something. You enjoy it. You talk about it, and get Squad more exposure and more business. You don't enjoy it, You also talk about it to warn others to be more cautious when considering the purchase. To complain about the fact that we are complaining is ridiculous. .... Let me know if I've misunderstood.

Part files aren't enough to diagnose this problem. Have you checked the logs for error messages?

No. but the smoothing shader might look a little off. I don't think 8 faces is enough for such a large component 12 seems more appropriate to me. You don't need to worry about triangle counts. If you make your models just detailed enough where increasing detail makes no visual difference, then it's ok.

Say whaaaat?

I have no idea what you're trying to get across. It seems completely irrelevant to what OP asked about.

No the long vertical thing connected to the box and the exhaust. Quads get triangulated automatically, because 3D graphics work with triangles, but you should be modelling with quads because it makes for nicer edge flow. The only advantage to triangulating faces by yourself is in places where you need to specify how the edges flow. That's not something you need to worry about for now. When you get more practice, you'll probably come across a place where you'll need to do it. For now just work with quads.

I guess Ven is still using the old way of scaling parts? Are "scale" and "rescaleFactor" both 1?

OK. I can only see some flaws with it: 1. That vertical thing that's off to the side could use more faces radially if you know what I mean. I could be as detailed as those doughnuts on the top of it. 2. The exhast could use two more edge loops to smooth out the curvature of it. 3. You could try to keep the number of faces consistent for round objects like the exhaust and the ring around the bottom of it. For whatever reason it looks twice as detailed when it doesn't need to be.

I clocked about 1000 hours before career arrived. After it did I tried getting into it, but I never even once finished the tech tree. Each time I started a new game I ended up abandoning the game quicker and quicker. I want to give 1.0*cough* a fair chance so I started a proper game on moderate and I'm making my way through it. It's still not nearly as fun as I remember KSP being in sandbox. The incoherent implementation of career ruined this game IMO.

How to search for all threads with a poll?

Again, Please start a new thread for this. I'll be happy to defend my view, but not here.

Start a thread.

None of this addresses my point... and you brought my money into the discussion for some reason...And this is getting off topic. I'll just leave you alone.

I'd love this to be a thing too. It'd be great for those of us who are a little obsessive.

And why not? Squad are making a consumer product, not a work of art. Why shouldn't people get what they want. It's the underlying principle of a free market. They will do what most people want or risk losing reputation. Simple isn't it?

Hello. This is getting annoying.

I think at this point the only way for Squad to save face would be to release a separate conversion DLC that converts the science system to something approaching what we've been screaming about. No that's just nonsense. Squad know very well that players didn't need an incentive to go out into the solar system before career mode was implemented, so they don't now. That's just flat out incorrect. Please don't resort to strawmen. It makes you look silly and doesn't move the conversation along at all.

Ok I thought this thread was for discussing bulkheadProfiles for everyone, but if this is just for you then I'll make another thread.

Yours and about half the community. Unlike many democratic systems though Squad apparently needs a super-majority in order to get a clue. Nothing happens unless there's overwhelming opposition.