Squadcast Summary for 2015-04-18 - Picture Perfect Edition!

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

So designing rockets and planning interplanetary travel doesn't qualify as problem solving?

Fine it's problem solving, but in no way is KSP a puzzle game.

[skykooler]

I get the "no procedural parts" bit, but why can't Squad just weld the fairings together on launch so they separate in two pieces?

[Superfluous J]

"Ablativeness" is a resource, right? An ablative shield has so and so amount of Ablativeness? Like, 50 units, or 200, or whatever?

I wonder if you'll be able to convert Ore to "Ablativeness" instead of Monoprop, Xenon, or any of the other resources.

[Ted]

I did manage to ask Kasper whether the fairings were persistent and he said that he couldn't confirm or deny.

I know this with pretty good accuracy and reliability, so I'll answer this.

The fairings are set up like the broken solar panels are. When seperated, the fairings are not created as traditional vessel debris - this understandably means that having lots of little fairing segments breaking off isn't as much of a performance hit as it would be if they were debris.

[Giggleplex777]

I know this with pretty good accuracy and reliability, so I'll answer this.

The fairings are set up like the broken solar panels are. When seperated, the fairings are not created as traditional vessel debris - this understandably means that having lots of little fairing segments breaking off isn't as much of a performance hit as it would be if they were debris.

Do the fairings always separate in segments?

[Ted]

Do the fairings always separate in segments?

Currently, yes. Will they in a release version? We will have to see.

[Giggleplex777]

Currently, yes. Will they in a release version? We will have to see.

Thanks for the reply. I'm looking forward to see what you guys are able to do.

Hopefully they separate outwards from the top like real fairings, since most fairings in KSP have their ejection force at the bottom (which could be a hazard for your rocket).

Edited April 18, 2015 by Giggleplex777

[Wallygator]

So since the fairings end up like solar cell debris...

Does this mean we cannot attach to them?

I like the fairing construction method somewhat, but I do not like the fairing deployment implementation at all.

[sgt_flyer]

Mmh, the fairings could really benefit from an explanation post on their own - it's really hard to understand how much they can be tweaked - especially for those of us that do replicas (and for a reason, we view the fairings splitting like they were presented not really positively)

One of the things that we know about it, is that if we don't 'close' the nose, we'll be able to use them as interstages. The rest - not so much

So - some questions : can we change the number of sides they split into ? (Ex : no split, just fall off - like Saturn V S-IC to S-II interstage) - splits into two - like most clamshell fairings - splits into 3 - like soyuz Block I interstage - splits into 4 - like Skylab's fairings.

And of course, if it's possible to avoid the breakup into multiple horizontal parts

[Sidereus]

Me likey the new intakes.

Also the utility bays. I've been using clipping, particularly with the large reaction wheel, which kind of works as a utility storage area because it's hollow.

I'd like to see some circular cargo bays too, though, like the Mk3 and Mk2 cargo bays.

ETA: Oh yeah, I've been hearing mention of fuel cells? Anything more on those? We've desperately needed an alternative to the RTG...hopefully these will be more powerful.

http://i.imgur.com/MsL8f6D.jpg

Whats this gear thingy? /\

I'm guessing it's the Engineers Report. It looks like it has replaced the Craft Stats (i) button. It also looks a lot like the button for Kerbal Engineer Redux, which is a white wrench without a gear...

Edited April 18, 2015 by Sidereus

[The Yellow Dart]

Has anybody at Squad given thought to the problem of parachute clipping? Or is that just something we have to live with?

Could you give the parachutes an oversized collider so that they can bump into each other and spread out like real parachutes, rather than phasing into each other with magic?

Also, in regards to the change in contracts, I think it would be better if, rather than making those basic contracts insta-accepted or however it will work, you could just combine them into 1 contract that still has to be accepted.

i.e. the first contract has all of the altitude records as objectives in the same contract, so you still have to accept it (seems like a better mechanic, rather than just getting money out the blue for doing things you'll do anyway) and you would get the money for each objective as you complete them, with a big bonus at the end of them all (orbit). Other ones could be Explore the Kerbin System, including all objectives for exploring the Mun and Minmus, or Explore the Jool system, including Jool and all the moons in one(with a MASSIVE payday at the end of it).

[basic.syntax]

The impression I got from Feb 24 Devnote Tuesday below, was that they MIGHT split along more than 2 vertical lines.

So will a single fairing that's 10 "pieces" tall and 4 "pieces" around count as 40 parts, 4 parts, or 1 part?

There's only one part, which is the fairing as a whole. Fairing panels aren't independent parts, they're sub-objects of the fairing until you deploy them. A fairing that is 10 sections high and divided into 4 sides would have 40 panels, yes. How many objects this will produce on deployment depends on how they group together (that's next up on my to-do list actually).

As for how the broken-off bits behave after deployment, they are handled as solar panel pieces or engine fairings. They aren't fully persistent (which is good if you like your framerates to be a two-digit number). That doesn't mean they aren't solid objects, however. Point away from face.

Cheers

[Giggleplex777]

So - some questions : can we change the number of sides they split into ? (Ex : no split, just fall off - like Saturn V S-IC to S-II interstage) - splits into two - like most clamshell fairings - splits into 3 - like soyuz Block I interstage - splits into 4 - like Skylab's fairings.

Yes, a single piece interstage would be awesome!

The impression I got from Feb 24 Devnote Tuesday below, was that they MIGHT split along more than 2 vertical lines.

I hope this is true, although (knowing SQUAD) it is very unlikely that they will a one-piece interstage.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Giggleplex777

[Tweety]

YAY saved the round 8! Although I fear the rebalance of it will turn into a whack-a-mole with the nerf stick. At least it still looks like we keep the most spacey part (in my opinion) in the game! Loading times....whaaaa?! Just 12 seconds?! That's just, well thanks immensely for that SQUAD! Still unsure of the fairings but I'm sure will turn out great and as for the new aircraft parts, WOOHOO! Finally wet wings! Bigger wings! Nicer intakes! Sliding scale for aero as well! Flying boxes hurrah.

I certainly think the devs are pulling out all the stops to do us proud! I'm glad they are since they have to impress a much wider collection of players soon. Thank you for the squad cast summary as well without these I wouldn't actually know anything about squad cast, it was these threads that actually informed me there was such a thing!

Much appreciated

Tweety

[check]

Questions! Questions!

Fairings: Will interstage fairings be possible? (Aka Saturn V style)

Storage compartments: Can we get rid of the post in the middle? With the post there it's hard/impossible to fit a tiny rover.

Xenon tank: Maxmaps mentioned that the larger container size is a more efficient choice than smaller sizes because it uses less material (ie has a lower dry weight) than stacking multiple smaller tanks which hold the same volume. Will this be true of other fuel tanks? IE it'll be more efficient to use one large fuel tank than 2 smaller tanks which hold the same total fuel volume because the dry weight would be lower on the larger tank? This would be more realistic and would incentivize players in investing in researching/purchasing large tanks.

Clouds: Don't see any in the pictures. Are we getting them?

Procedural craters: Hard to tell with the one shot of Duna, but are we getting procedural craters like on the Mun on other bodies, finally?

Heatshields: Look awesome!! Seeing as overheating can destroy ships and presumably kill kerbals now, what about excessive G forces?

Mk3 Wings: Wooo wetwings! How about the ability to create wings in the same manner as the fairings? Clicking anchor points and then auto splitting the wings into multiple sections?

That is all.

[h4didact]

Now that the ROUND8 is safe, I am SO hyped with the Mk3 wings. I've been building a shuttle for months now. That tail fin LOOKS INCREDIBLE. I'm so happy again.

[SkyRender]

So glad they fixed the initial contract problem. I recall demonstrating that it was very easy to get contract-locked if you accepted them and failed to achieve the goals behind them. I just hope they do something similar for the planet/moon contracts as well. The way the system currently works, it's entirely possible to get zero credit for reaching Minmus simply because you went there before going to the Mun!

[HafCoJoe]

I'm not convinced that we won't get tidier fairing separation.

Wait what. XDDD

IIRC, the fairing parts are considered the same as broken solar panels - they exist, but once they go beyond the physics bubble, they are deleted forever. Temporary debris, no Kessler Syndrome here.

Also yes, pls merge this thread into my Summary?

Hey I was here first! Yeah would a mod please merge this thread into ObsessedWithKSP's? ^-^

Edited April 18, 2015 by Avera9eJoe

[ShadowZone]

Those screens look incredible!

Great to hear about the Round 8 staying as it is.

Yay for loading times! Mk3 Wing parts! Craft thumbnails!

I am getting in line for a ticket on the hype train

[Columbia]

Let me quote Danny2462's first reaction to re-entry effects:

"It's shiny!"

Although I just find it a bit of a bummer that the new parts are specifically Space Shuttle-designed. (Commercial Jet wings and tail, anyone?)

But still, this week's Squadcast was awesome!

[bakanando]

What is the hexagonal sensor thingie on the satellite?

[KerikBalm]

I'm going to love the increased physics bubble.

That is going to make reusable rocketry so much easier.

Previously, if you separated your craft prior to 23 km, and it got more than 2.5 km away, you lose it.

2.5km going to 25 KM means I should be able to get one craft on a near orbita trajectory, and then switch back to the reusable booster.

Sweet.

This gives me hope that I can abandon SSTO launchers, and go with reusable 2 stage stapceplanes.

Which is good, because I expect with reentry and the new aero, that a 100 ton to orbit spaceplane would be much much harder to make.

[basic.syntax]

What is the hexagonal sensor thingie on the satellite?

I believe that's a narrow-band scanner for pinpointing the best mining spot. Revealed in a previous Squadcast. There's a larger one for full surface scans. (It's shown folded up, in pictures on that linked page.)

[Eric S]

You forgot to mention that Max showed off the decoupler bug.

I thought he said that they may have fixed that for 1.0, that they had figured out why ejection force was disappearing. Am I wrong? Wouldn't be surprized, was running around making dinner while listening to it.

[basic.syntax]

I thought he said that they may have fixed that for 1.0, that they had figured out why ejection force was disappearing. Am I wrong? Wouldn't be surprized, was running around making dinner while listening to it.

Around 36:00 into SQ, after the 2nd or 3rd time his craft-of-the-day had unceremoniously self-destructed, he talks about it and said he believes it's been fixed, but wanted to check to be sure, and might let folks know with a tweet or other posting. He was really appalled over the situation and let the craft spin out of control, for all to see. If Ted checks this thread again, and could help with the question, forum readers would appreciate it