panzer1b

How to land rovers... "Mass Effect Style" Works every time provided i balance the thrusters properly (otherwise it ends up worse then the one shot through the conduit...).

I think ive found my problem, all of the tools i have (assets editors) seem to have issues with current version of unity... Both UAE: unity assets explorer, and UAV: unity assets viewer seem unable to properly work with KSP's unity version. Bloody annoying... Does anyone know of a tool that allows me to open the KSP_Data files (sharedassets9.assets in particular) and edit the textures and then save it properly so the game loads it correctly? UAE cant export properly (the 1.1.3 pic of exported sun flares shows what i mean), and UAV lets me export as it outta, but when i try to replace the image with a new one it gives me white squares instead of proper sun flares Any tools that can extract and most importantly insert images to override the default ones in the assets files?

Doesnt kopernicus rely on scatterer though? Ill go check it though... Anyways, its not that i dont want scatterer, hell, i use it for almost all cinematic purposes, but its just that when i disable it for regular gameplay i really miss that one particular effect it had (made the sunflare actually decent looking and you could customize it). Scatterer (and EVE for that matter) and 2 mods i really really like to have, but are just too laggy when combined with any sort of large scale vessels (1000+ parts). Slow game down way too much for me to keep them enabled 24/7, but i just really want the sunflare and nothing else for non-cinematic purposes. Only other effect i use when out of cinematic mode is killing the unbearable ambient lighting. Yeah it makes the game "easier", but there is nothing realistic about the sheer amount of light the stock game has at night, way too bright (and darkness makes lights actually matter to a degree). Luckily ambientlightadjust does this and from my experience doesnt use any resources (all it does is alter a in-game variable to change light level)...

So can you tell me what the issue is? If its something about dropbox i can always upload it to another site... Also, i do not use any part mods so everyone should be able to load up one of my ships regardless of model... Ohh, and while my craft was designed for aesthetics, one of my main goals was to make if functional in the stock aero and thus the main test would be whether you can actually get it into orbit at all (the absolute max ive ever managed was 200x200km although ive launched it like 20 times by now so i know the exact profile, kinda curious what someone who hasn't ever flown it can do).

Well as the topic says, im looking at replacing the terrible stock sun flare with something more akin to sci-fi movies/games, but i cant seem to do that in a lightweight way. I know in the past you could replace the sunflare.tex file found in sharedassets9.assets, but it seems that they altered the shaders recently (or something i dont quite understand) so that you cant actually do that anymore without creating something like this: The following image is a side by side comparison of what i pulled out of the sharedassets9.assets from 1.1.3, and an old mod that happened to feature a custom sunflare for the game (which was done by overriding the stock game's files). Obviosuly the newer version of KSP uses some sort of altered shader that reads from each one of the layers (A, R, G, B) and interprets that into the crap we know as the sun glow effect in stock KSP. Ideally id like to be able to alter that image to give me my own custom effect (lets face it, the stock one is neither realistic, nor what i want: sci-fi), as itd let me have my new sunflare with 0 resource requirements as its nothing more then a texture change. If anyone knows how to do that then id apreciate the help. Also, an option i am considering (if there isnt any performance issues) is replacing the shaders with older ones (i have backups of older games, just need to know what file to pull and place into teh new game). Also, before anyone mentions it, im perfectly aware that scatterer has its own special shader and easy way to create your own sunflare effects, but id much rather not have to install a bulky (and FPS tanking) mod just for one minor feature. If there is no other option i will pull the source code and remove everything from that mod but the sunflare shaders/effect, but im wondering if there is a better solution (preferably without increasing lag as its bad enough 100% stock with 0 mods when you decide to spawn a 1500 part ship and actually dock to it)... So, any ideas as to what i can do about this?

I think everyone here will be happy with the new KJR like implementation of the automatic strutting ive just seen in the livestream. Armor will become useful again and well, i cant be certain until ive tested it, i think we are going to end up with less 1 shot kills and more longer term battles where people slowly chip away at the armor and try to knock out critical bits such as engines, weapons, and fuel tanks instead of the usual instakill the thing with 1 shot to the core. As soon as 1.2 comes out its time to build some invincible warships...

Its about time for squad to allow every single stock part to have its staging disabled through the right click menu. Fairings arent necessarily used as fairings exclusively (myself ive used em for structural parts, fuselages, ect where you never want the thing to be deployable). Even for stuff you expect to be stageable (like engines) there are too many occasions where i want something to be manually enabled. For most VTOL designs i prefer to have the dedicated VTOL engine out of the staging menu since its something that is situational and i dont want it to activate until i hit the action group. TLDR, please allow us the choice to disable staging on every component if we want to do it that way, its already possible to do it with part cfg mods (so little no no effort to do this), and it would really open up more options (and save us the trouble of accidentally staging stuff that should never get staged).

Im onboard for this, even something as simple as a rotating gizmo (0.6 and 1.2m versions) would be adequate since you can make almost anything with it. Hinges can be custom built with a rotator sideways, and the rotator works for other applications like turrets, station rings, and general realignment of parts. Linear pushers would also be nice but really the one and only essential movable part would be a 360 degree capable rotator. Its not like we dont have our share of stock movables (airbrakes make exceptional doors, cargo bays, hell even the antenna makes for a decent door), but id love to see a limited version of the robotics mod in stock game just so i can make mechs (and a whole lot of other things like actual low part count turrets, custom doors, ect) without loading up infernal robotics...

I have to say i like the new engines, although most of the ones already in game are adequate for my tastes (all 1.2m and 3.5m ones look fine as is, its just the very tiny engines and the 2.5m ones that can really use an overhaul). That said, the number of times i use the rather bad looking engines is extremely rare since im almost always using 3.5m parts for excessively large craft, and most other things are either 1.2m or the 48-7s engine so those look perfectly ok for me (the 909 while not stellar is actually one of the best looking engines from the days before Porkjet even existed...err started making stock parts for KSP...). Perhaps the main reason i dont mind the change is because i never actually became attached to any of the older parts, and i have nothing against them being completely redone in a new art style. The only craft that are going to suffer visually are my pirate faction craft (lets face it, the reason they even look like pirate vessels is because they have hulls made of structural panels and old style engines), and while that isnt great, i dont mind that alone. The only visual change that i refuse to accept (and will mod it out if it ever happens) is structural panels becoming white. The stark contrast between structural panels and wings makes most of my spacecraft look cool and not monotone, aside from that, whatever changes to the visuals are ok with me... All in all (with the exception of making structural panels similar to wings in appearance), im all for whatever new updates to the visual style of parts...

Well now that i finished this thing, i think ill submit it for you if you are interested... Anyways, its a fully functional SSTO SR-1 Normandy replica with a customized interior (really getting into making custom interiors recently since im in need of some cinematic capital ships for my comic im working on). You might have some trouble actually getting this into LKO (may take a few tries if you dont get the ascent profile correct, check the link for the download and the flight instructions which will help you alot). Aside from that, im still working on a new mako for it (the old one sucked) so in a bit ill update the craft with a rover that can be air-dropped ontop of the enemy (and more likely then not will explode right after you do so). It has no armor to speak of so you probably dont need to test that out (go ahead and blow it up if you feel like it though), and its weapons are pretty much there for the hell of it and nothing more (although with good luck you can 1 shot almost any ship with them, optimal range is ~200m). Otherwise, im super happy with the internals, make sure to bring plenty of kerbals onboard it when testing so it looks best when you have them manning crew stations...

Well here is something im actually quite proud of, a SSTO capable SR-1 Normandy replica (4th iteration). While i am by no means the first to create a SR-1 replica, i do believe this is the first one that is 100% stock and can both SSTO on Kerbin/Laythe and happens to have a 100% customized interior that is as close to the one in Mass Effect as possible. Every major interior section of the ship is modeled, bridge, CIC, debriefing room, stairs, elevator (used pods to allow crew to go from upper floor to engineering deck), mess hall, medlab, Liara's room, captains cabin, weapons control, engineering, and the armory/mako bay, and the external appearance is as close to the Mass Effect one in terms of size and proportions (not perfect but the closest possible while keeping it aerodynamically stable). Standard model stats: * 432 parts * 292t * 12 RAPIERs * 8 turbojets * reaches a 80x80km orbit (maximum) with just enough fuel for RCS (much harder in 1.2 but the new one does make it) Action groups: [1] RAPIERs [2] switch cycle mode [3] toggle interior (opens the cargo bays so the interior is accessible, this should be open in space, but needs to be closed when entering any atmosphere or the ship will experience incredible drag and flip backwards usually tearing itself apart during aerobraking) (no more VTOLs in 1.2 version as the new drag just kills the performance of anything that isnt a realistic jet replica) [abort] open pod bays and deploy escape pods (technically decouples all the docking ports in the escape pod bays so anything attached to those will decouple) [brakes] open/close windows (do not engage when flying in atmo or the ship will nosedive) [stage] hit once to engage all forward engines, subsequent uses fire the 2 weapons one at a time (make sure to open the rover bay when firing) Instructions for SSTOing (successfully ): 1) takes off easily above 150m/s, best results when 170-180m/s 2) pitch up at 20-30deg and climb subsonic up to 10km 3) level out and accelerate while keeping the vertical speed close to 100m/s 4) pitch up to around 15deg when at 20km (ideally you will be going above 1200 by this point) 5) engage rocket mode on rapiers when you exceed 25km (you should be going at least 1150m/s, faster is better) 6) keep pitch at 15-20deg until AP is 45km, then prograde until AP is ~70-80km 7) thrust as needed to maintain AP as you glide thru atmo 8) circularize as with any craft 9) reenter and land as any other craft but keep vertical speed very low during landing (avoid bumpy terrain or the entire engine assembly will explode more often then not) SR-1 Download A few final notes: The craft can carry 10 escape pods but only 2 are included out of the box and it cannot reach stable orbit with all 10 pods and the VTOL engines. The VTOL system is extremely weak (and useless on anything with heavier gravity then the Mun). It is designed purely for deploying vehicles as it will allow the craft to maintain a certain altitude when flying below orbital velocity. While its possible to deploy makos out of it without the system, using it creates acceleration that gives the wheels traction (so the vehicle just drives right out of the bay). Im going to make a new mako since the one i used initially sucked (placeholder just to show proof of concept), will have that uploaded soon (and if i can get it to work a version of the SR-1 that can SSTO with a mako loaded inside it since the thing barely makes orbit as is). The craft uses a trick with cargo bays to disable drag on the entire interior. This blocks access to the interior (and will often spagettify kerbals if it isnt opened and you try to EVA one inside of the ship), so you have been warned, make sure to hit [4] after reaching orbit and before you start interacting with the ship in any way (close this whenever you are in atmo). It also makes the top look better (more rounded as the actual SR-1 had). Also, the craft features "windows" on the front and back in the form of elevators that block the view when they are deployed as flaps. This is bound to brakes (and doubles up as a airbrake that cannot be used while in flight but works on the ground very well) so toggle that if you want open or closed windows. Its not 100% authentic that the briefing room had windows at all (placed there for aerodynamic purposes), but if you want to go ahead and open them for a nice view to the rear (may help spot collectors before they start shooting). Weapons are fairly lousy and are mostly there just because the original craft had weapons, and they are actually located in a similar spot the original ship had its guns. Fired via stage and can be aimed manually using the weapons control room (cockpit in there that gives you a forward view past the guns so just have the target ship directly in front of you while you fire). If you want to use this for combat i suggest adding some sort of small guided missiles into the escape pod bays (plenty of 0.6m hardpoints and you can still carry a few escape pods). Anyways, i hope you guys enjoy this, originally intended for cinematic purposes but i think i wont use it as it doesnt fit the aesthetic style of a particular faction i planned it to use...

Im almost 100% aesthetic (most of my non-competitive capital ships i design the outer shell 1st and then cram whatever i need inside it there), so yeah, function comes second although i have built plenty of "ugly" vessels intentionally. In terms of ugly, most of the time its because i want it to look that way as almost every single ship that is designed using pirate faction style looks like crap welded together in orbit (and some of it actually was done that way using KIS). I kinda have a few visual styles i work with because i like to design variety of ships, so almost anything from super sleek curvy ships to simple and efficient boxy designs, to crap that looks like it was made out of wreckage. That said, i do actually design almost every one of my ships with function in mind (only ones that i dont care about this is purely cinematic vessels which are intended to be hyperedited around and used for relatively static roles like command centers, rally points, carriers, ect). Ofc i usually end up making compromized in the later stages of ship design so the initial prettiness may drop a tad in the final product, but i never make 100% utilitarian craft that are purely intended to function and dont have some visual appeal. Then again, its all rather subjective, there are very few aesthetic styles in KSP that i consider lousy (ok hate me for it but i actually dislike most modern replica aircraft and all conventional rocket styled designs), i prefer sci-fi inspired vessels, but i pretty much like the majority of anything that isnt a pod with a fuel tank below it and then engine below that...

Honestly do whatever you enjoy, its what i myself love about KSP, its so open and you can build almost anything (within the simplified physics engine that is). I have to say im about 25% spaceplanes and 75% rockets in time spent flying and building. I really like making insane sci-fi stuff liek capital ships, starfighters, carriers and all of that requires a rocket to launch so i tend to spend the most time with them. That said, most of my time is engineering teh payoad since i really dont care about the launch stage and mostly use nasa parts and overkill launchers since i play sandbox exclusively and dont care about funds, so the fastest/easiest thing thatll get what i want up there up there works for me. As for spaceplanes, aside from crazy stuff like my relatively recent fully SSTO SR-1 Normandy replica, i generally make very long range SSTO style fighters (as in over 7000dV after reaching LKO without refueling at all). I used to be a tad obsessive with the SSTA concept (single stage to anywhere) but with the changes to aero making airhogging and the for all intents and purposes infinte range jets nolonger the case, its alot harder and just not worth the effort to design something that can launch from kerbin, land on eeloo, and then come back to kerbin without using IRSU and without staging whatsoever... That and because every single craft i ever make has to carry weapons, its even harder to design something with the ranges i need (the lightest weapons payload is ~1t, so its vitually impossible to make a SSTA while carrying 1t of dead weight the entire trip (and keeping it under 50t which is my absolute limit in mass for fighter style craft)... TLDR, just build what you find fun, some people really like engineering, some prefer flying around the system, some like combat, some like exploring, some like vehicles, some planes, ect. Just do whatever you enjoy out of the game and dont do something you dislike (and if the stock game isnt your thing consider mods because almost anything from 100% realism to sci-fi parts are available if you want them).

Well i think ive just outdone myself... A fully functional SR-1 Normandy replica with a detailed interior. I modeled every single room, from CIC to engineering (although enghineering isnt quite as large as it outta be). Aside from that, the bloody thing is under 600 parts (yeah its laggy and terrible but given its size and full interior i cannot complain), aerodynamically stable (draggy as hell but it flies no worse then a very heavy jet fighter), capable of air-dropping vehicles (yet to make a decent mako for it but at least it works in theory), and unlike every one of my older attempts, the hull shape is fairly close to the original and the only really visual issue is the engines which i cant quite get 100% look good because of the fact it must be aerodynamically stable and SSTO capable. Ohh and in case you were wondering it is SSTO capable (albeit very bad efficiency since its incredibly draggy). I need to improve it so it isnt 1000t heavy on the pad (dont ask how the hell i got it off the runway ), and perhaps upgrade it so its a little bit more efficient as right now its literally a brute force SSTO rocket (it flies like 1 too) so while it can fly like plane it isnt exactly going very far cause dragfest. Open spolier for more images and interior, wont take up 10 pages... Whoever designed the mass effect ships should never apply to become an aerospace engineer, engines below the craft requires way too many wings and those super high gimbal engines to fly...

Absolute biggest pain in the arss ive ever dealt with... Weighs too much and too draggy to be launched the old fashioned way (as in rapier spam)... And this is what happens when i get above 250m/s when using brute force and spamming those shuttle engines! At least the central hull is rock solid! The wings and engines need a complete redesign from ground up, but the actual hull (and the amazing interior) really makes this ship worth the effort! I WILL have the first SSTO SR-1 Normandy replica (with interior, weapons, and even a mako you can like drop out of the bay as you could in mass effect)!

Well there is something im working on i think ill submit to you (once its finished that is, prolly a few days). Im actually working on a fully SSTO capable SR-1 replica with a custom modeled interior... Doesnt look like much yet but i still havent added all the interior details like crew stations, finish the hangar (which btw ive actually managed to air drop a rover out of which then exploded as i forgot to add parachutes!), and then actually get the engines as it was in mass effect 1. What i have now are placeholder VTOLs just to see if it was even capable of airborne operation at all since used cargo bay tricks to disable the aero forces on 90% of the interior so it doesnt fly that badly... Its not quite a combat ship (armed with 2 single shot cannons and no armor to speak of), but i think its thusfar my greatest achievement and makes the old SSTO SR-1 i had in 0.25 look like trash (not to mention this one works with new aero and doesnt use any real exploits aside from alot of part clipping which isnt even a exploit in many eyes).

Aerobraking alone cannot and will not be survivable, so you need to rely on engines (or heatshields but that craft lacks them). Ive tried many times and aerocapture/aerobrake mandates some sort of heat shield (unless you make a massive wing which has so much drag is may as well be a airbrake), and the biggest problem is when you enter into around 75% of teh atmosphere's max height where you are moving too fast and the atmo isnt quite thick enough for you to get decent braking performance out of a craft like the one you pictured. If you really want to try it, i suggest getting just above teh atmo and gun the engines full power retrograde and dont stop using em until you are well below 40km (if you can get that far aerobraking dominates heat in most vessels). It is really a 50-50 chance (i wouldn't do it without a revert option, nbo idea what settings you play on), worth a try if you are a gamber, but i would say that the particular craft you have is unlikely to be able to pull off a successful Eve landing nomatter how you do it because you need some decent TWR to actually brake with engines so your speed drops faster then your altitude does.

If you are looking at duna there are 2 major options (from my experience) that make the most sense. The 2 practical ways to get into orbit around duna is either a grav assist from Ike or a aerobrake maneuver, so the 2 best spots for a station are either around Ike, or in a fairly low orbit around Duna itself (where craft can go to right after aerobraking). I myself prefer the Ike solution as 90% of everything i send to Duna has over 2000dV after reaching LKO and thus has no issues reaching Ike regardless of how i choose to go about getting there. Also, it may be worth mentioning that Ike has less gravity making any sort of landing operations (Ike is almost always a better bet for IRSU if you are into that) far easier and its relatively easy to get from Duna to Ike and vice versa (fairly low fuel requirements across the board with the notable exception of taking off from Duna which requires at least some thought into fuel requirements). That said, if you arent interested in Ike at all set up in low Duna orbit (100-200km) because your craft can aerobrake directly into a similar orbit and then intercept without needing to use any real fuel That said, given that the entire Duna system is relatively low on fuel requirements once you actually get there from Kerbin, basically any spot will work fine provided its not in the atmosphere (makes rendezvous kinda hard), or on a trajectory that could result in smashing into Ike or being shot out of the system after passing by it.

Sofar none of my designs work (made one with wheels back in the beta 1.1 but thats not the current version and doesnt count). It appears that the common place landing leg ones are also completely dead because back when you could use the legs to push a few parts and it created the wobbling which pushed you around, now legs dont do that. Personally i dont mind as kraken drives (and infiniglide) was so broken that there was no challenge if all you needed to push a 200t capital ship was this puny little setup in the rear (and some RCS for docking as you cant quite dock accurately with a krakendrive). That said, i do believe ladder drives still work, as i have experienced alot of phantom forces from kerbals and ladders in general (not to mention plenty of EVA bugs that turn kerbals into spagetti and then end up with broken space-time or weird things like FTL drive velocity). Might be worth looking into kerbals as the new kraken drive since they seem to still have plenty of bugs associated with em (and if all else fails use the infinite propellant jetpacks to save your ships that are outta fuel).

While im generally against time limited mechanics (LS of any form) or any sort of wearing out (engine failure over time, batteries, RTGs, cpu on probe cores, ect), i would actually support this under the condition that both batteries and RTGs never become dead, but end up with reduced capacity over long useage cycles (and something like total energy generated by the RTG as a time based mechanic would add too much background processing needs to the game as every vessel with 1 on board would need constant calcs, instead make it get weaker after a certain amount of energy is extracted from it). Solar panels could also have a similar mechanic, which lowers their effectiveness with more energy obtained from them. The actual bottom limit would need some balancing, but i think if batteries and RTGs ended up at ~50% of their original capabilities after a long useage time then itd both show that actual batteries and RTGs do indeed have lifetime considerations, but at the same time it doesnt completely screw over stuff that ends up in use for a very very long time (ive had a few ships that lasted over 100 kerbal years before they were completely destroyed or abandoned). I dont consider things like equipment failure a fun mechanic, but in this case i have to make an exception since i really like the concept, but it has to be implemented in such a way that it doesnt render vessels useless after a certain period of time. Yeah if you go into absolute realism everything has a end date after which its worthless, but i think such a mechanic wouldnt make the majority of KSP players very happy (myself included), so cap the end value at some percentage thats reasonable like 50%...

That makes my 980 part Venator replica look simplistic... 1800 parts JUST WOW, i prolly couldn't even load that without crashing ... Also, i really like those turrets, not as armored as my own variants made primarily of structural panels, but they feature 2 axis of rotation.

Personally i feel it is about time for @SQUAD to make every single part optionally stageable. There are too many situations where i never want something to even show up in the staging such as fairings used as structural elements, any emergency use components like parachutes, escape pods, emergency thrusters (all of that is bound to abort and i dont want any of it in staging menu), all engines on a VTOL craft (staging isnt useful for those craft that need to use control groups anyway and often enable/disable engines during flight), tanks (staging the turret is super annoying when id rather bind turret decouple to action groups). While we technically "can" get around this by putting everything you dont want stageable in the last stage and rebinding teh stage button to something that isnt easy to press by accident (i have it on insert), id still prefer the option to disable staging on every single stageable component when we deem it necessary or simply more convenient to do so (keep defaults as is, but sometimes people just want to be able to disable staging without resorting to mods)...

I have to disagree but maybee its because my weapons dont rely on joint breakage. Almost all of my kills using my own weapons are caused by the root/skeletal parts being essentially vaporized. Maybee i rely too much on ibeam based weapons, but 90% of complete kills are when the ibeam phases into the core and when the 2 collide the core (or potentially whatever skeletal parts it hits) is deleted and the ibeam remains usually at enough velocity to do more damage.

A bit off topic, but im actually curious as to what this setting really does, does it actually edit the colliders or just change the visual overlay (which may or may not coincide with colliders?). If the colliders are the same then there is absolutely no reason to remove the setting, since it makes games using high/med/low setting 100% compatible anyways regardless of what you have. Ill take a bit and check myself whether my landed vessels explode and or go flying when you mess with the land settings... Also, i actually have to say the setting doesnt affect performance much either. I may be biased (i have a fairly solid gaming lappy), but texture settings, land quality settings dont actually affect anything to a noticable extent. The primary performance affecting factor would have to be part count itself since i often build massive craft and pit them into battle with each other, so yeah, something like 1500-2000 parts loaded simultaneously isnt exactly rare...

I have a good feeling for 1.2 and armor... Engines will now be capable of strutting themselves to the root part, probably not invincibity but if that is the case we are looking at much sturdier ships (no more wobble at all), and most of all said ships should be far tougher to kill (and save part count with automatic struts!). Unless im mistaken, this may very well be the update that makes armor competitive again and lets me get away from my recent high part count redundancy spam styled ships.