woppeldopple

Hehe. - Except center of mass (extremely trivial, i am not willing to argue about too) is the only thing that would be used in a phsyics engine. - You were fixaded in the isolated word "inertia" i mentioned as prove how easily it would be implemented. This leads to severeal problems: - Firstly i feel responsible to reply on this - Secondly it shows you don't know what inertia is and why a point mass is not the same. (the formula will not help here) - Your Chicaco friend posted an anonymous email adress and tries to disguise as someone he'd like to be (but cant afford a better pc). But he looks through the problem neither. summa sumarum: youre arguing about the (wrong) implementation of a point mass simulation completely ignoring Squad will never create a physics engine from scratch. Everybody concerned with professional software development knows that even a simple 2D engine comes with huge effort. It is much more than 2 formulas (lets pretend the ones you posted were approriate). Why this effort? Because you strongly believe a point mass is the same as your 1000 parts construct? Sorry i have to LOL about this, too. May i ask you stop talking things like "from programmers point of view ... " - you dont know this view! Reading further the arguments even go hair-rising.... Still all the contra arguments were completely ignored and are not understood by you and the professor in spe. Quite rediculous - i didnt want to response but you guys started abusing "inertia" i mentioned. You can take this as critique for your (sadly quite typical for KSP community) style of "discussion". This is no discussion its a fight for wrong arguments.

Repeating yourself doesn't make it more true. //Edit: Pointless thread. Happiliy im this will never happen! Over and out!

Elitist? No. Technically obvious? Yes. Have a sober look at it - i can affort high end harware neither. Perhaps you underestimate the consequences of the cheat-fairings by far and more than that you can not appreciate KSP like it is. KSP is far away from being a simulation. Truncating basic physics means completely destroy all the "realism" we have. @tntristan12: Sadly i have no clue what you mean. Can you explain again please? You dont "launch" anything. You cheat it in space.

It would ruin the game. Physics simulation is a core feature of KSP and you want to disable it? Im very sure Squad will never do such a ... folly. Did you consider the slight possibility that your computer is not powerful enough when you cant have fun due to laggyness? But this is no reason to truncate KSP! KSP is alpha btw. Usually optimization is low priority. Im sure we will see performance patches in future!

Haha, nice! Exactly. This is KSP. Not rediculous overpowered, but plausible and full of possibilities!

Oh dear... ... one more hint: Of course your launching vehicle is not necessarily the same! Replacing a complex construct with a point mass is not the same.

What does blah blah mean? Do you shut your eyes and ears because you cannot bear the truth? What you said has nothing to do what i said ... oh you dont know what i said, forgot it for a second! Or you did not understand? Well In both cases: read it again ^^

No transparency needed. Just mark the hidden markes with different colors/greytone. This was suggested several times. Im sure Squad will implement a solution some day!

Your rocket provides the same dV before and after the ratio modification. I named the variables you can adapt to reach this goal. What else should it mean?

Sounds exactly like that ineed ^^

+1 For crazy fun travelling on mun there should be much more creative ways available. Like RCS command seat with RCS fuel tank as landing leg

What about adapting fuel consumption of the engines and tank sizes to dV = const?

Very bad idea. You want to disable all the phyics within your magic bobble leading to the ability to launch the most rediculous constructs to space that normally would completely distort the rocket and everything else? What about torsion forces and inertia of your giant part? The fact its stable in space doesn't mean it is stable during launch with high G-stress. This would completely destroy the idea of KerbalSpaceProgram. What you want is a magic cheat box to bring your too big constructs with a too slow computer in orbit - the thread should be renamed accordingly. Just use docking! You cannot launch anything.

I'm not the OP and me asking for units (an absolutely trivial wish) is not the topic and no reason to debate absolutely pointless. I end this now ... @Topic: For me one single reason is enough to introduce real world ratio: Education.

Oh dear. Units are mandatory. It belongs to the number like the verb in a sentense. Whats your problem at all?

Yup, unfinished gameplay of an alpha version.

Your answer is completely off-topic so i take the relevant part if you mind: How do you know? Currently i dont have KSP access but last time i looked i did not find such an ingame information at least in part description. (And this is what i am talking about btw. Feel free to join or go on talking about very obvious things )

Oh really? Some peoples' profession tell them to be precise, you know?

I support this. This would be a good reason to introduce units, too! 90 "fuel" doesnt tell me anything! ^^

Replacing light with darkness for the background scene doesn't sound very complex to me. ^^

+1 I mean, you can reach orbit of Minmus easily! Does anybody know how much fuel do they store in numbers? And why are they refuled in spacecrafts not containing any RCS fuel? This is too simple for such a complex game!

While Kerbals are rendered in 3D in right bottom corner anyways it would be awesome to be able to look from outside in the cockpits and watch the kerbals doing its job!

Are you familiar with General Terms and Conditions of spaceport/SDK/Mod-creating? It can be legal. See Minecraft.

As far as i can see KSP uses unitys built in phyics engine. In order to multithread it they'd have to choose a different physics engine like BULLET or ODE. I dont think this will ever happen, because it would take much time and resources. Perhaps they manage it to improve performance without switching engines!

Whats this?