Moar Procedural parts.

[ZooNamedGames]

1 minute ago, W. Kerman said:

*But then you'd be consuming tons of fuel,

also, wait 3? Fuel cell... Fuel Cell pack.... What's the 3rd one?

Oh wait- Alternator from the engine? That's back at my first point!*

It's power source  . I mean I see your purpose in requesting it and especially if the game stretches outwards it'll have a significant demand, but as I see as of right now, there's not HIGH demand, but obviously we've got some to testify there is at least some demand  . 

I'm for it. Tired of these dinky panels  .

[Vanamonde]

The fact that some people violently dislike the appearance of some of the parts is off-topic for this thread, and is an argument already taking place on other threads. 

This thread has gotten back on-topic now (procedural parts), so please keep it that way and stop attacking each other personally. 

[tater]

1 hour ago, W. Kerman said:

Proc Solar panels are getting a lot of hate.

Here's the case for them:

Say you have an ion drive cluster.

Out at Eeloo, you have NO OPTION except to panel spam if you want to power it.

If you could resize solar panels, you could avoid the lag of panel spam.

They get hate because they will certainly look cruddy. SSTU has some huge panel arrays (purpose built, not procedural), and they look great. Other mods do as well. Some things don't scale well. Plain tanks? They look fine properly scaled. Solar panels? Not so much.

Eeloo is the KSP Pluto. Solar panels shouldn't work. The point is not to have everything work everywhere, the point is to force design compromises. Your Eeloo craft should have RTGs.

Edited April 18, 2017 by tater

[steve_v]

I vote Yes. Procedural parts already work well where mods have provided them. 
Any procedural parts will reduce part count, and anything that saves memory or improves the performance of the lousy physics engine is a win.
As well as that, procedural tanks reduce the horrid "stack of barrels" aesthetic, and procedural wings make aircraft look like aircraft, without ugly Z-fighting where wings are clipped to make clean lines.

That said, I'd not want all parts to be procedural, personally I'd say tanks, structural components and wings for sure, and possibly a few other bits like batteries (and please, please integrate realchutes).
I don't see any advantage to procedural engines, solar panels, radiators, etc. though, that's just removing the need to make design decisions. Besides, scaling parts with detailed structure will look hell-ugly.

[LoSBoL]

For me using procedural parts would make it a gamechanger. Part of the fun for me is that you have to be creative in the way you stick parts togheter, and like LEGO, you can't strech parts to easily get what you want. Creating workarounds is part of the fun.

Would it be possible to implement procedural parts without breaking savegames? I'd be very dissapointed if implementing them would ruin my savegames.

[W. Kerman]

8 hours ago, tater said:

They get hate because they will certainly look cruddy. SSTU has some huge panel arrays (purpose built, not procedural), and they look great. Other mods do as well. Some things don't scale well. Plain tanks? They look fine properly scaled. Solar panels? Not so much.

Eeloo is the KSP Pluto. Solar panels shouldn't work. The point is not to have everything work everywhere, the point is to force design compromises. Your Eeloo craft should have RTGs.

To fully power an ion cluster of 4 out at Eeloo, you would need...

3.666*4=14.66 electric power per second.

14.66/0.8 (RTG output)

You would need 19 RTGs.

I guess the thing is that we need bigger nuclear power parts.

[tater]

1 hour ago, W. Kerman said:

To fully power an ion cluster of 4 out at Eeloo, you would need...

3.666*4=14.66 electric power per second.

14.66/0.8 (RTG output)

You would need 19 RTGs.

I guess the thing is that we need bigger nuclear power parts.

Then ask for bigger nukes. Solar doesn't work well in the real solar system past Mars without large arrays---used to power radios and science gear, not insanely powerful ion thrusters.

[TheKorbinjer]

On 8/13/2016 at 2:54 AM, Bloojay said:

One thing that I really really would appreciate is the addition of moar procedural parts in the same vein as your fairings, like: 

Wings and Winglets, so you don't have to faff around with making your own wings by combining wings not designed to fit together. 

Fuel tanks, I just want more accurate lengths, and the ability to replace oxidizer with more liquid fuel for nervs.

And a few misc parts here and there like langing legs/wheels, solar panels, and/or to some extent a few engines.

I like the lego aspect of ksp but after playing for 1000+ hours, farting around with wings tanks and landing gear can become rather annoying if you know exactly what you want to make at what size but are restricted by the limitations of size set parts.

don't forget the addition of stock propellers

[Skylon]

Fuel tanks: Yes, with different textures available

Engines: No, I want different models (and good ones )

Fairings: Yes, though I would still like the ability to make my own/edit them

Landing gear: Not procedurally generated, but more (like angled ones) yes

Wings: Yes

Solar: No, but maybe adding more panels to extendable ones. Possibly just add a ISS SAW-type one as well

 

I only want these implemented if it reduces the workload of the devs

 

Edited April 18, 2017 by Skylon

[Vanamonde]

Quote

The fact that some people violently dislike the appearance of some of the parts is off-topic... 

You are free to talk about their appearance. You are not free to attack each other over opinions on the subject. 

[Wjolcz]

3 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

You are free to talk about their appearance. You are not free to attack each other over opinions on the subject. 

Fair enough.

[Capt Snuggler]

I used to be completely against all procedural parts, But now I really think procedural wings would help with aircraft building.

Piecing together all the little wing segments is tedious. Clipping together loads of wing segments to get the desired shape just looks messy at best.

Stock wing thickness is often out of proportion with larger designs.

I invite everyone to check out Bac9's mod. it really opened my eyes to how much better my KSP life could be.

 

*For the record, I'm not convinced procedural tank sizes would make a positive addition to the game, however tweakable tank skins with heat tile and ultralight gold foil options, with their respective pros and cons, would be a nice addition.

 

[Sputnik 1]

On 8/13/2016 at 8:44 PM, AlamoVampire said:

If they are done as badly and unituitively as the stock failure fairings then Id say heck no. However if done like the infinitely superior proc fairing mod and proc parts mod then yes.

Whats wrong with stock fairings?

Edit: Nvm I saw your other post.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Sputnik 1