Jump to content

Renegrade

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,419

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Renegrade

    Kerbal Space Program 1.1 Hype Train Thread.

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, Temeter said:

    These stats aren't conclusive anyway. I think this is just the list that compares the amount of negative and postive reviews? If anything, it says people 'playing' nekopara know exactly what they want. ;)

    Oh true - I thought it was more of a 'time played' or 'concurrent players' sort of thing also, which was a bit of a misconception on my part.

    Kerbal Space Program 1.1 Hype Train Thread.

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Temeter said:

    Yeah, but that list also says Nekopara Vol.2 beats it by 9 places. :3

    True, but I've played over 3,500 hours of KSP, and only 400 have registered in Steam (it used to be 700 but reset at one point) as I really only play the Steam edition for a little while before copying it away from Steam and/or downloading my store version.  Steam stats for KSP are probably understating the situation a lot more than Nekopara Vol.2's stats.

    Plus running the .exe directly doesn't register with Steam for KSP (unlike some other games).

    I may think Squad is screwing the pooch on a fairly regular basis and missing many opportunities, but it's still a fun game at the core (the concept is superb) and worthy of high ranking.

    What have you been the first to discover in KSP?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    Uhh.. I discovered a bug wherein your filter icons won't work unless your navball is up in map mode (someone else in the thread actually discovered it was related to the navball).  Yay?

    The bug is quite annoying.

    Other than that, I'm not really sure who discovered what in what order.. and besides, those relativity quacks scientists would tell me that simultaneity and order of occurrence is irrelevant anyways due to blah blah time dilation blah blah length contraction blah blah relativistic mass blah blah different observers in different frames of reference blah. :/  I think they're just pulling everybody's leg though.

    However, we all know, quackery or no quackery, that I was the first person to invent a badminton birdie for the purposes of parachuting a craft back to KSC in the old aero (my avatar)  :P

    Realism vs Stock

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Geschosskopf said:

    For example, the AVERAGE density of Kerbin itself is greater than that of osmium, the densest element known in our universe, because Kerbin is so small yet still produces standard Earth gravity.

    Actually, there are denser materials*.  Electron-degenerate matter is significantly denser than Kerbin for instance (ten billion kg per cubic meter - Kerbin's only off by a factor of three from conventional matter).  An electron-degenerate object with the same mass of Kerbin would be only roughly 11km in radius (vs 600km).  To give it the same surface gravity as Earth/Kerbin would probably involve something even smaller (I'd plug the numbers into the equation, but I've gotta leave shortly.. er, I mean, SHOULD have left a little while ago.....exercise left to the reader?).

    * - well, theoretical materials.  Nobody's ever landed on the night side of a neutron star and brought back a sample. ;)  

    Sandbox misconceptions?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Renegrade
    highlight in red

    Well, it's like the recent delta-v discussion re: mods.  I can impose my own restrictions and progression, but that's inconvenient. It's much easier when the game does it for me.

    Also, games are designed by game designers, who are skilled in setting up meaningful progression and restrictions and such, much more so than I am.  Or, well, that's the way it's SUPPOSED to be. *cough*goodjobSquad*cough* *cough*moretiersincareer*cough*  *cough*weneedmoremeaningfulprogressionintechnologyinthesciencetree*cough* *cough*theMPLisamassiveprogressionfubar*cough* *cough*Icoulddothisforhoursifitdidn'thurtsomuch*cough* *cough* *hack* *cough* *dying*

    (well, to be fair, there's literally thousands of game/sim writing houses, and maybe five of them have good designers, and about two hundred have incredibly lucky ones that initially look like they know what they're doing until they release their second game.  Squad's probably slightly ahead of the curve.  Hooray for bell curves! >.> )

    Also sandbox is cheating (JUST KIDDING).  #cheatingmeme'd~

    Kerbal Space Program 1.1 Hype Train Thread.

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    41 minutes ago, Laguna said:

    Another new 1.1 feature revealed on today's EJ_SA Twitch stream:  Vernors can be thrust limited, and RCS thrusters (both vernors and monoprop) are axis-configurable (like control surfaces) both in rotation and translation! :)

    NathanKell was in chat and said that the capability was already in 1.0.5 but that there were no buttons for it connected to the GUI.  

    Okay, THAT's increasing MY hype level.  Woot!

     

    Hype level is up

    Burn IPS 4 down now

    With the fire lemons

     

    Delta V question

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, wumpus said:

    It is hardly my chart (this one came from KSP-wiki, with plenty of cites to reddit).  But once you understand delta-v (like the OP was learning), it is a great time to see it.  I have an older one printed out taped to the side of my monitor.

    I used to use such a thing (it was less accurate though, older, had some errors) - I actually run things through the vis-viva equation nowadays (actually a script that I scribbled up), or use the Transfer Window Planner for interplanetary (the mod version is much faster than the web version) with my script to estimate landing costs.    Such tools are definitely handy and I do recommend their usage.

    What gamemode do you play ?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    I like the idea of career mode, although I do agree with the posters above in that it's rather lacking in many ways.  I'm hoping the improved contracts of 1.1 will help a bit, and there's been some mutterings of more stages to the KSC facility upgrades (although that's just a rumor/may only be in 1.2+/etc)...

     

    What's with these mass discrepancies?

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

    Imperial worked well enough to get the United States to the moon and back.

    That said, let's not derail this thread any further into an argument about metric vs imperial.

    Well, except that was von Braun's rocket, designed in metric, and only converted to imperial units for manufacture.  He really hated those feet and picas and drams and such.

    I do agree that we're likely derailing at this point and I'm willing to agree-to-disagree here.

    Realism vs Stock

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    My own preference is in a philosophy I call "non-#lolfake".   Excessive realism is detrimental (the single-precision engine can barely handle the tiny stock system, let alone something real sized, for example) to gameplay, but on the other hand, excessive fakeness is harmful too.

    To illustrate the stages of realism, consider the reaction wheels:

    > Current reaction wheels are #lolfake - they are a hundred to a thousand times stronger than real devices, and do not suffer from saturation (nor gimbal lock).  This is undesirable as being way too FAKE.  Also their overpoweredness let people cheese their way past design issues and such.

    > Nerfed down reaction wheels with lower strength but not modelling saturation or lock is acceptable realism to me.  You'll see people use RCS (just like real craft) to overcome the weakness.

    > Having saturation and lock on the wheels is excessive realism.  The middle case gets the same feeling across at a much lower cost in terms of computational complexity and human/interface overhead (although it is cool that mods exist to model such things).

    So when I complain that something is #lolfake, this is what I mean.

    Kerbal Space Program 1.1 Hype Train Thread.

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, JohnF said:

    If you go to Twitch right now and search everyone playing KSP, lots of randoms are playing 1.1. So is the entire experimental team now doing public streams or releasing SS as seen above? Or is there a way to get the 1.1 prelease that isn't just opting in on Steam. Cause it's weird that random people who are not on the media team, are not regular Kerbal streamers, and have no following are streaming 1.1. Do I have to go get 2 people to watch me Twitch stream to get access?

    How do you know they aren't part of the media team?  The team's pretty big these days... Is there anybody in specific who's definitely not on the team streaming 1.1?

     

    What's with these mass discrepancies?

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    On 2016-03-27 at 7:56 AM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

    1 U.S. ton is 2000 lbs.

    Is a 1:2000 ratio really that "weird" compared to 1:1000?

    That's really odd, I thought for sure stock KSP accounted for this, I'll have to check it out on my copy when I get a chance.

    Yes, it is weird, as it's actually 20 hundredweight (cwt -- well, US cwt.  British cwt is 112 pounds, which is 8 stone), which is 100 modern Avoirdupois pounds.   So it's really more like 20:100, not 2000 directly.  Which in turn is 32,000 ounces... or 512,000 drams, or fourteen million grains.   So 20:100:16:16:27.34375 (or 27 and 11/32 if you prefer for that last number) ... yeaaah... not weird at all.  Nosiree.  Totally sensible system.  Was NOT created by drawing numbers from a hat while drunk.  Honest!

    That's leaving aside all the classical, pre-metric measurements for 'pounds', like Troy pounds, London pounds, and Merchant pounds, all of which have significant differences.  And forgetting to mention that a US ton uses the (modern, metrified) Avoirdupois system, and is actually defined as being '907.18474 kg'.  1:907.18474!  Excellent!

    I'm so glad Canada switched to metric/SI when I was a kid.  That imperial junk used to give me the WORST headache.  10:10:10:10... is a lot easier to remember than 20:100:16:16:some-number-that's-almost-thirty-I-think(and also a different set of numbers from length measurements - 1760:3:12:6:12 -- leaving aside links and furlongs and blahblahblah). Plus it's a lot easier to skip units.  How many ounces is 16.5 tons?   16.5t is 16,500,000 grams.  Also.. can you be sure we're talking about short US tons, and not long British tons?  Or not some historical measurement of ton that is wildly different than a US short ton?  For example, old sailing ships used to be taxed based on a 'ton' that was actually an estimate of volume.  A very POOR estimate of volume to be specific.

    PS.  I won't mention the quarter if you don't!  er, oops, dammit, I just did... Nobody saw that!  Nothing to see here, move along, move along!  :P

    Kerbal Space Program 1.1 Hype Train Thread.

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    1 minute ago, sp1989 said:

    Two questions. Percentage chance 1.1 is released this week? And Does the 64 bit include Mac?

    Soon™ percent chance of release this week (which is pretty good.. I think?).   I believe they stated "64-bit for all platforms" earlier too.  Then again, I'm a bit confused as to why Macs aren't already 64-bit as they're rather similar to Linux (which already has 64-bit Unity support).... Sure, a mach-derived microkernel is just a bit different from the monolithic design of the Linux kernel, but you're still taking like POSIX and OpenGL and sockets and glibc and such (even if it has a more BSD-type flavor)...

    how many times you have visited dres?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    Actually, they're right, dres doesn't really exist.  It's actually a bug that merges the Mun and Ike and performs some surface transforms on it, and places it in a boring orbit.  It's pretty much an optical illusion.  When you land there, you're actually rapidly flickering between the Mun and Ike in some sort of Star Trek-y quantum phase inversion fluctuation.

    I've been to that optical illusion (and it's tiny, un-noteworthy canyon that the terrifying Mohole eats for breakfast) somewhere between three and five times.  I've done a manned return from it at least once, but my detailed analysis confirms the 'dres is a bug/illusion' theory.

    So, in conclusion, dres is an angry space potato cut-n-paste of the Mun and/or Ike.  I might be more interested if it had a mun of it's own or something (dresteroids were a valiant effort in that direction, but ultimately fail to raise my interest level sufficiently), but it doesn't, and will always remain the angriest, nastiest space potato until something truly interesting happens there.

    TL;DR version: dres is an angry space spud (that doesn't really exist).  I've been there 3-5 times and the boring nearly killed me. :P   11/10 would be bored to death again -- IGN

    Let's talk about fairings for a second...

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    I'm with @regex , Procedural Fairings are the bomb.

    1 hour ago, KerbonautInTraining said:

    The pre-release is stated to last two weeks. I assume any bugs not found or not fixed by the end of the two weeks will be carried over to 1.1. 

    A feature is merely a bug with seniority.  Heh.  ;)

    (I think you're right; anything we don't catch or isn't fixed will definitely roll into 1.1 as an outstanding issue :/ )

×
×
  • Create New...