Jump to content

Time to make SRB "better"?

Daze
 Share

Recommended Posts

Daze

Daze

Posted
Posted

Hi guys, i was thinking that with the introduction of "real" aerodynamics a Thrust curve for SRB would be nice, so for example your SRB won't stop immediately causing problem to your rocket (especially on something like a STS). Obviously in my mind this possible "thrust curve" would be shaped by the player. What do you think guys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kegereneku

Kegereneku

Posted
Posted

I think I can speak in the name of those helping news player by saying "It's might not be really worth it".

Along many change for "realism" that could just add more complexity without bringing much to the gameplay.

Though at least this one don't require a lot of coding, so why not, having some control over SRB thrust over time would make Solid-fuel launcher more efficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mythbusters844

mythbusters844

Posted
Posted

YES! YES! This! I would absolutely love to see SRB thrust curves in game. I just hate it when I add boosters to get a liftoff TWR over 1 then get 6 gees of acceleration at SRB burnout and insane speed at low atmo, which causes dire problems with FAR. This would be especially useful for all-SRB launchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hcube

Hcube

Posted
Posted

I totally agree with this thrust curve system ! Id love to have it stock... Since the SRBs are a bit trashed in KSP, its really needed ! (Also IRL they have gimbals, an not in ksp)

I think I can speak in the name of those helping news player by saying "It's might not be really worth it".

Along many change for "realism" that could just add more complexity without bringing much to the gameplay

I do not agree with you since i believe that we (the ksp players) too often see the new players as ignorant newbies incapable of figuring out anything by themselves... Just add something to the VAB tutorial saying that it is more advanced ! People that buy ksp obviously are somehow into space, science and discoveries, they can explore the game

And it DOES add a lot to the gameplay, especially with the new aerodynamics model !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hcube

Hcube

Posted
Posted
Also i would suggest to make the RT-10 0.625mt of diametere, it's simply disproportionate for his length

yeah but then make it a bit longer otherwise it would be a huge nerf to it... and maybe making it blue-grey instead of yellow would be cool too. Yellow makes it look not serious enough on a rocket

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
uzxnjtg.png

Something like this.

This would be a very welcome addition to the game. You could have the normal thrust limiter replaced by this when clicking the "Dynamic" (or maybe "Advanced") button
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scruffy

Mr. Scruffy

Posted
Posted

And to gain additional profile nodes, you have to fullfill parts of a testing ´contract´. Like ignite (!) them in incrementing altitudes, gaining one more node for each, say, 8km upto a cap of 64, or so (numbers thrown at me by the kraken - and the linear formula, too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KrazyKrl

KrazyKrl

Posted
Posted
And to gain additional profile nodes, you have to fullfill parts of a testing ´contract´. Like ignite (!) them in incrementing altitudes, gaining one more node for each, say, 8km upto a cap of 64, or so (numbers thrown at me by the kraken)

Wait, fulfilling contracts to unlock more tweakables for your parts? I would love something like this.

i.e. Test prototype LV-T30 (With LV-T45 properties, but no gimbal) in sub-orbital flight on kerbin. Unlocks the LV-T45 after the contract is completed.

Tech-tree prerequisites for parts that require contracts to permanently unlock them, would be amazing. And adds more progression to the game. It removes some grind out also, since it's something meaningful you're testing to unlock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whirligig Girl

Whirligig Girl

Posted
Posted
yeah but then make it a bit longer otherwise it would be a huge nerf to it... and maybe making it blue-grey instead of yellow would be cool too. Yellow makes it look not serious enough on a rocket

Yello is Jebediah's trademark color (On his parts, not his suit, duh). I will boycott KSP if the RT-10 is made blue.

If anyone actually thought I was serious, you need to slap yourself now. Done? Good. Now I'm sorry for making you slap yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scruffy

Mr. Scruffy

Posted
Posted (edited)

xpost

There could also a bit of improving of already unlocked parts, for fullfilling testing-contracts with increasingly harder conditions.

Like in:

Test some heavy (ish) engine in some high (ish) altitude /speed to gain a bit of VAC-ISP (like: 1). After the fifth time you did that with a specific engine, the ASL-ISP would drop by one each time. After improvement, specialisation could work as a natural cap. High speed but low altitude for better ASL-ISP.

Edited by Mr. Scruffy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwhip

Starwhip

Posted
Posted
I do not agree with you since i believe that we (the ksp players) too often see the new players as ignorant newbies incapable of figuring out anything by themselves... Just add something to the VAB tutorial saying that it is more advanced ! People that buy ksp obviously are somehow into space, science and discoveries, they can explore the game.

I don't see how anyone would see the new players as incompetent... weren't we all new players once?

How long did it take you to learn the basics? A week? And the more advanced stuff comes naturally once the basics are learned, probably at most another month of playtime.

Anyways, I'd also like to see this in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magnemoe

magnemoe

Posted
Posted
I think I can speak in the name of those helping news player by saying "It's might not be really worth it".

Along many change for "realism" that could just add more complexity without bringing much to the gameplay.

Though at least this one don't require a lot of coding, so why not, having some control over SRB thrust over time would make Solid-fuel launcher more efficient.

Just having trust falling off during burn time to say 50-60% would help a lot, however not sure how much problem with is with better aerodynamic, Far has lower drag at low attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...