Renegrade
-
Posts
2,419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Renegrade
-
-
I'm kinda NO on the shiny myself. I'd much rather 'em spending time making the planets nicer than the ships if they're going to be doing a prettyness pass. Volcanos, ice geysers and rings and whatnot.
1 minute ago, Edax said:I'd only want this after they solve the framerate issue on all 200+ part spacecraft. Otherwise, this game would devolve into a power point presentation.
That would actually be trivial to do - as it stands, ships are a bunch of interacting physics parts, which each part being it's own separate component. Each component exerts force on every other component, etc, hence slinky rockets made out of battery stacks and such. Like most serious problems, this does not lend itself well to multiprocessing, or even computing for that matter. The simple and obvious solution is to part weld each stage (or indeed, the whole rocket) into a single part. It would easily speed the game up tenfold (if not a hundredfold or thousandfold or more), allowing for much, much bigger rockets. The downside is that structural design would pretty much vanish at that point.
That's why Space Engineers can handle much larger ships part wise: they're actually just minecraftian voxel grids and have little or no self-interaction. The grid as a whole moves, not the individual parts.
-
I'm rather amazed that people can be impressed by what amounts to a semi-transparent, billboarded texture :/
13 hours ago, mythbusters844 said:What do you mean? It looks BEAUTIFUL!
Not bad for a beginner, but if you want to become a REAL multi-billion dollar movie director, you'll need more horizontal diffraction going on. Imagine a panel van grinding along a wall, and what it's paint job would look like after, and then invert the dark scrapes and scratches to being blinding light..and then crank that up to 11.
Only then will you have true mastery in the JJ style! Let the hate flow through you!! BECOME ONE WITH THE (ironically named in this case) DARK SIDE!!!1!!!one1!!!eleventy!!11!!
*cough* ahem..
-
30 minutes ago, razark said:
Can we make pointless lens flares an option yet? I mean, seriously. Civilization has spent the last many years trying to remove a flaw, just so people can add it back in when it doesn't need to be there? How about we make it so that the screen just goes blank after a few seconds to imitate the lack of oxygen, too?
Totally agree with everything you've said here. The irony is kinda staggering here - spent billions tryin' to reduce these things, and now we're spending more puttin' 'em back in.
A fake, cheezy, tacky effect.. like that ricochet sound that bullets used to make in older movies. Abram's revenge!
-
You could always just send robotic resupply missions to Eve to keep the kerbal(s) alive. TAC LS containers aren't particularly heavy and only moderately unwieldy.. just drop in with some supplies every once in a while to keep the kerbals going. If you're not opposed to science labs (I am, but I can comprehend that others are not), might even put one of those down there. Multiplier is probably pretty good?
I do surface studies in BTSM on canned life support all the time (and that's without KIS/KAS).
If you do have KIS/KAS available to you, so much the better for resupply. It's so easy to hook up with some hoses...
-
4 hours ago, Curveball Anders said:
Note the experimental (as in a select group of non-Squad getting access) hasn't been announced yet, they've just teased that it might possibly be announced this week.
Yeah, that will be Soon™, and then release will be Soon™ thereafter.
I made reference to the definition of Soon™ elsewhere -- one example I gave is that the Moon Landings happened Soon™ after the Great Pyramid at Giza was built, heh.
-
1 hour ago, KerbonautInTraining said:
Well, they DO know what's in pre-1.1 saves. All the software has to be able to do is interpret old saves and re-compile them into 1.1 saves. I'm pretty confident it will work as advertised.
Now, if you're using lotsa mods...
*wince* I think this confidence is...unjustified. Also, hope for the best (works flawlessly and actually fixes issues in older saves and doubles your tax return), but expect the worst (Felipe lost a hard drive, y'know...could be related heh).
-
*cough* Soon™
The dev blog implied that it might take a bit longer than usual... :/
-
This idea has come up before (well, broadly at least. The stacking rules might have been different back then), and I supported it before as well, and continue to support it now.
9 hours ago, kujuman said:First, in response the the first rational for the change given (that maxing the tree in Kerbin's SoI isn't fun)--well, that's how other players enjoy the game, and it's unreasonable to limit what others can do to have the stock game better fit one's own play style.
It's unreasonable to limit what others can do to have the stock game CONTINUE to fit one's own play style. *cough*
The real problem here is that people who prefer the existing "balance" (I use the term loosely and scathingly) could easily re-establish it by hauling the science gain slider to the right when setting up a save, but people who wish to play with the diminishing returns style system are unable to do so at any slider setting (setting it to 10% or less isn't the same, for example, as you end up with a really large early grind which redefines boring to new levels of hideous).
Also we're ignoring the elephant in the room of the fact that the tree is just a random hodge-podge of parts without any real progression (I think Harv described it as an 'extended tutorial' that 'reduced newbie part confusion by restricting the available parts'), but that's a subject for another thread. Also ignoring the MPL issue...
By the way, in your analogy, when you landed on the feet of the animal, you already knew it was furry, had fur on the top and bottom, had samples of aid fur, probably had enough data to determine if it was warm blooded or not, and most likely had a rough idea of what sort of feet it had and number of legs etc - your return from that mission would be significantly less than the first landing on the back. You still learned something, but a lot less than the first landing. Well, assuming the first landing worked. If it crashed and burned, you probably only learned that it was solid and crashing into it is a bad idea, heh.
-
On 2016-02-26 at 7:05 AM, John FX said:
On another note though, it is now MONTHS after we were initially told 1.1 would drop (before christmas), it would be nice to have some more solid info on what is happening as far as moving toward a release date...
SOONtm is becoming invalid after such an amount of time...
What? How could Soon™ ever be invalid? It means, and I quote the Squad Concise Dictionary:
Soon™ - adverb - meaning sometime in the future, somewhere between "why the hell did this take so long?" and "never".
Since we haven't reached "never" yet, I'd definitely say it's still valid. The full version of the dictionary goes on with extended definitions indicating that Soon™ could very well fall long after "I'm too old to click a mouse anymore", and gives some examples, including: "Soon™ after the Egyptians finished the Great Pyramid at Giza, the Americans landed on the Moon" and "Soon™ after the Big Bang, the universe died due to entropy".
TL;DR: I've long ago given up hope of timely releases, and embraced the eternity that is Soon™.
-
On 2016-02-26 at 6:45 PM, SnakyLeVrai said:
I'd like to make sure everyone understand the do's and don't about fuel cell regeneration... I've sketched up some SCIENCE! about it, it's a little more complex than just using extra fuel cell energy to make LFO back from water.
I just adore those diagrams, by the way
-
There's nothing quite like using a reduced-fuel Hammer to put something on course for the Mun or Minmus... So fast.. much G.. many fun. very scared. wow. /doge
It's not the most practical or efficient thing, but most of my final stages will have liquid engines of some kind, so any small errors in the burn can be easily corrected. The only thing to watch out for is making sure not to accidentally trigger it...you don't want the engine activation to happen until you're at the node
(sure beats the snot out of slowly burning away at
30er18er50er 60 kn fun-wise and time-wise..) -
Re: Minmus inclination
It's easy to adjust the inclination of a Minmus-bound ship by waiting until it's a bit past the Mun's orbit. Burning normal/anti-normal at that point (instead of in LKO) reduces the cost from a constant 300 delta-v to 0-60 (depending on how close the interception is to Minmus' AN/DN).
It looks something like this:
(Note that this isn't a perfect example, I threw it together rapidly to demonstrate to someone else. Adding a tiny amount moar anti-normal here would make the insertion better, for example. Also the second node is probably further out than is optimal)
-
2 hours ago, FullMetalMachinist said:
Then it really just comes to a difference in play style. Instead of concentrating on Kerbin ground/flying science, I usually make orbit by my third rocket launch, and am flying a small rocket on a Mun flyby by the fifth. I don't really even touch planes before I've sent my first unmanned interplanetary prove.
As for role playing, I would rather my Kerbal Space Program scientists work on science from space.
That's one thing that's bugged me for a while: Why are we getting science at all from things like the KSC runway?
Surely the KSC isn't the only science institution on all of Kerbin (it's apparently not even the only space program -- those capsules in Minmus orbit have to get there somehow)? Surely other people (well, kerbals) have already learned everything they can from samples from really bad dirt roads?
I much prefer the BTSM approach that ground and low altitude science provides absolutely zero science..it makes sense. NASA and/or Roscosmos aren't going to be landing in my back yard anytime soon to take material samples from the goddamn barbecue.
-
29 minutes ago, eddiew said:
Clock it to the same GHz as the old one and it'll prove to be faster. A 6600K at stock speeds is a sad thing to behold
Unfortunately that's unlikely - the benchmarking for the new system was done at stock clock, which is only 6%-ish faster on the older unit (3700 vs 3500 non-boost)..
-
I have a Sandybridge-E 3820 running at 4200mhz with 32 gigs of RAM - it's about four years old now, and I'm not going to spend another fifteen hundred (it's probably 3k now, thanks to the dollar difference) to lose 20% performance.
(got the lil lady a 6600k@3500 and it's 20% slower on general integer-fp performance. Using lookup tables reverses and doubles the difference to 40%, but nobody uses lookup tables anymore, even if they are twelve times faster)
-
54 minutes ago, Jim DiGriz said:
There's people out there who still believe voodoo about 32-bit being faster than 64-bit.
Voodoo? Like objective tests? It kinda turns out that the obligatory doubling the size of certain types of data (such as, oh, pointers), and optionally doubling certain other types (such as 'int' -- which may or may not get bigger, depending on the platform) can have some, well, serious repercussions for data locality. The difference used to be about 15%, but with newer versions of GCC, it's become about 30%...in favor of 32-bit code.
Of course, I don't think Squad will ever be able to completely rid KSP of memory leaks (some may even be Unity's fault - it would only take one mistake for a reference to be held somewhere on the Unity side when it should have been released, etc), so I can't say I'm sorry to hear that there will once again be an official amd64/x86-64 version of KSP. Hopefully without the weird glitches this time.
As for operating systems, all I can say is my netbook is extremely glad for 32-bit OSes: the Atom processor it has is not amd64/x86-64 capable. Granted, I'd never do any real work on that thing (it's terrible), but it is rather compact and handy for random light browsing.
-
By the way, regarding the "poor TWR" of the Nerv, keep in mind that the chemical engines ALSO have poor TWR compared to their real world analogs. If the Nerv was ever buffed to 'realistic' TWRs, I want the chemical engines buffed to realistic TWRs too. Back in 0.90, the top liquid fuel chemical engine was that KR-2L thing, at about 39:1 if I recall correctly (and most engines were more like 25:1 or less), whereas real chemical engines can go upwards of 150-180 (Merlin 1D). Unfortunately my little TWR chart is out of date, but I do believe the current crop of engines are actually worse than the 0.90 ones.
(Note also that NTRs have never flown in real missions and thus I consider any and all numbers on them to be extremely speculative/guesstimates/WAGs and may turn out to be totally wrong and/or impractical. It wouldn't be the first time the unexpected kicked something in the butt, rendering it useless)
@regex - a thermal engine running on Aerozine50 with hydrogen-level specific impulse. AerozineH2! It's magic stuff!
-
I'm pretty sure the default modes have always had this 'issue'. It hasn't noticeably changed in recent versions.
@TrooperCooper - thanks for pointing out the setting for the double click issue. That was annoying me quite a bit!
2 hours ago, Aloriel said:In fact, I've found that it is quite difficult to *add* gimbal lock in Unity. The default system uses quaternions, which have no gimbal lock, and thus all of the rotation commands for cameras and objects also have no gimbal lock. So, I can only imagine what they went through to actually achieve it. I am assuming something on the order of rewriting many thousands of lines of code, simply to introduce gimbal lock where none exists.
Thousands? I'd say it's about thirty lines of code in ANSI C to write a simple fixed Euler system that creates a matrix that you could pass to OpenGL for the view matrix. I stopped working with LPHURTSMYHEAD err I mean DirectX back in the DX5 era (actually more like DX3, although I did upgrade some of my code to use the call that lets you set resolution AND refresh rate from DX5 (DX3 didn't let you set refresh rate when selecting a mode)), but I imagine it's probably only forty or fifty lines for DirectX too.
Random aside:
Firefox says that 'quaternions', 'gimbal', 'LPHURTSMYHEAD' and 'DirectX' aren't actually words. Firefox is wrong. Also it failed to automatically ™ the DirectX™ word. So, if I don't ever post again, I got sued out of existence. And here I thought they were finally making progress, what with an official 64-bit Windows binary and all...
-
I'm torn between 'not caring at all' and 'absolutely effing no'.
My feelings when I see an achievement pop up varies on a spectrum between ennui and absolutely murderous hatred, depending on now obnoxious they are (as defined by the presence and volume of any noises made, and the percentage of screen real estate they occupy, and how close said real estate is to important things such as dangers or important HUD elements etc).
The existing World's First things or a typical Steam achievement (given that I have the moronic overlay off) are closer to 'ennui'. That stuff that the 360 does is about a third of the way to a 'Trevor incident'.
-
Those 'ghost mountains' are much nicer than the invisible walls on Pol~
-
56 minutes ago, RoverDude said:
The logic was that there is simply limited storage space in the MPL - and it's a tweakable value (like several others) that allow for tradeoffs, etc. when using the partmodule.
It definitely accomplishes the limited storage space goal very well, but uh, it kinda underlines the weakness in the existing stock mechanisms for dealing with/sorting/moving tons of science reports. :/
I remember paging through something like 88 reports in orbit of Minmus at one point..
-
8 hours ago, regex said:
For instance, having something like KER in stock/vanilla would likely mean it would be severely reduced in functionality to fit the silly stock meta of starving the player for information and thus you'd still end up installing KER.
This reminds me of the terrible fixed stock Applauncher vs Blizzy's flexible/movable/submenu-able toolbar.. I was happy to learn that we'd have a stock toolbar, until I actually played with it.. :/
-
9 hours ago, godefroi said:
First of all, "out of memory" nowadays is never about memory. It's about the address space. You don't run out of memory, because Windows (or whatever OS you use) will happily use swap space to fill in for any physical RAM you're lacking. It's not going to be fast, but "out of memory" you will not be. You run into problems when you run out of address space.
Er, the way you wrote that suggests that swap is unlimited in size *cough*. Hard drives, even the big scary bit-devouring magnetic beasts, do have limits. (otherwise true though)
QuoteAlso a common but incorrect belief is that PAE expands the address space of a process. It doesn't. Remember, it's PHYSICAL address extensions, meaning it lets the processor address more than 4GB. 32-bit programs are still limited to the 4GB address space (of which, 2GB or 1GB is consumed by the operating system). Even Address Windowing Extensions doesn't do that. 32-bit pointers are 32 bits log, and that's as long as they'll ever be.
This is correct, although I seem to recall that enabling PAE at kernel compile time lets you drastically shrink the OS footprint in your virtual space (down from 1GiB to a handful of megabytes) in Linux.
-
13 hours ago, satnet said:
I would also suggest http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/ for planning a transfer burn. It is similar to olex's, but it tells you the in-game time when the transfer window will occur. It also makes it obvious that it is a window where you have times that are really optimal and some around it that are not as optimal, but OK. There is also a mod that does nearly the same thing (Transfer Window Planner?).
The mod is actually based on alexmoon's code - and it's a bit faster to boot. The magic of open source
13 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:That feel when someone else pimps your videos for you
The funny part was, I was going to post that myself but didn't want to seem like I was just here to advertise.
Well, it's a clever concept, worth re-posting
I just love it how it can be done with a stock install. Great for those windows after a new release when mods aren't updated
Should SQUAD make parts shiny and reflective?
in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
Posted
There's actually a mod that does that, by the way, heh.
I suspect the real reason it hasn't been done is that Squad likes the battery-slinky ships.