Devnote Tuesday: The experimentals Quest!

[Superfluous J]

3 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

Do not want!  The mapview is my refuge for using the Steam overlay!

Hit > and get 5x time warp. You can then shift-anything and be perfectly fine. Even outside of map view.

<mom_mode>And if that gets you to whatever you're doing too quickly, you probably shouldn't be chatting with your friends. Eyes on the navball!</mom_mode>

[Caelib]

So can anyone explain the status of the revamped rocket parts?  The pre-release version doesn't include them so I am confused as to when those will be available in the game.  Help?

[Superfluous J]

2 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

And before anybody starts suggesting work-arounds, yes I know there are plenty of ways to do the same thing, but most of them are less convenient or more complicated, and those that aren't are probably what I'll now have to train myself to start doing instead.

I read this after I posted. But I still think it's a good "workaround." At LEAST as easy as hitting "." to lower the navball that I assume you... wait you don't use map mode without the navball do you?

[FullMetalMachinist]

21 minutes ago, Caelib said:

So can anyone explain the status of the revamped rocket parts?  The pre-release version doesn't include them so I am confused as to when those will be available in the game.  Help?

They're not currently in the stock game, but probably will be in the future. 

For now, the ones that are done are available in this thread as a mod:

 

[The_Rocketeer]

25 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

wait you don't use map mode without the navball do you?

Double negatives... interesting.

For manoeuvre planning/examining the map, or anything else that doesn't need throttle, sure. For burns, hell no.

[Superfluous J]

15 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

Double negatives... interesting.

Never avoid a double negative if it wouldn't fail to get the point across.

[AlphaMensae]

1 hour ago, Caelib said:

So can anyone explain the status of the revamped rocket parts?  The pre-release version doesn't include them so I am confused as to when those will be available in the game.  Help?

From what the devnotes said, the full revamp is a huge project that is still far from finished but due to the...um, shall we say, strong interest and anticipation for them, what HAS been finished was released early as a separate download, sort of like a DLC.  I suspect a future version of KSP will have the full revamped part set.

[Corona688]

3 hours ago, Laguna said:

The Rhino now looks much more like the J-2 and J-2X engines it was based on, and the vacuum thrust lowered to match as well, though it's actually STILL too high for a stock KSP version; the original J-2 had ~1000 Kn thrust, the J-2x would have been ~1300.  It's an upper stage engine, and shouldn't be capable of high sea-level thrust.

The full-width Rhino with the base plate also looks like the bottom thrust structure of the S-IVB stage, and with the compact version you'll be able to put five of them on the bottom of a 5m tank to recreate the Saturn V's second stage.

The Vector (and the Mammoth, which is 4 Vectors) probably could use a thrust nerf, to make it less OP and more suitable for both shuttle replicas and regular rockets.

The nerf which bothers me the most is the LV-T45.  For a long, long time in career mode it's the only decent engine you have, and it's been nerfed in thrust and efficiency without reducing its weight.

[NoMrBond]

2 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

The nerf which bothers me the most is the LV-T45.  For a long, long time in career mode it's the only decent engine you have, and it's been nerfed in thrust and efficiency without reducing its weight.

There are multiple upgrade items affecting its stats along the tech tree, it's not as good when initially unlocked but ends up better when fully upgraded.

[Corona688]

But they said they weren't doing the part upgrading thing, I thought.

And that does nothing to change my point about the engine being substantially less useful.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Corona688

[Superfluous J]

1 minute ago, NoMrBond said:

There are multiple upgrade items affecting its stats along the tech tree, it's not as good when initially unlocked but ends up better when fully upgraded.

From what I read, @Corona688 totally just ninja'd me and I'm going to stop typing now.

[AlphaMensae]

8 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

The nerf which bothers me the most is the LV-T45.  For a long, long time in career mode it's the only decent engine you have, and it's been nerfed in thrust and efficiency without reducing its weight.

That's also in keeping with it's partial Atlas LR-105 sustainer engine appearance.  It was the upper-stage engine on the Atlas, though it was started at the same time as the two LR-89 booster engines (because when the Atlas was being developed it was not known if a rocket engine could be started in space, so all engines were lit at launch).  It had much less thrust than the LR-89, so the new T45 should have less thrust and lower atmo ISP than the T30.

[Corona688]

This is not a good thing, though.  This does nothing to change my point about it being substantially less useful. 

[Laie]

6 minutes ago, NoMrBond said:

There are multiple upgrade items affecting its stats along the tech tree, it's not as good when initially unlocked but ends up better when fully upgraded.

I still recall that such proposals were swatted in Suggestions, because it makes it harder to swap&share craft files. I was very much with the swatters then, and don't mind now -- apparently I'm not the only one. Or is there any outrage I missed?

[Superfluous J]

1 minute ago, Laie said:

I still recall that such proposals were swatted in Suggestions, because it makes it harder to swap&share craft files. I was very much with the swatters then, and don't mind now -- apparently I'm not the only one. Or is there any outrage I missed?

As long as the "upgrade level" is in the .craft file, I see no problem. Though that might be tricky.

I will admit that the whole sharing of craft is pretty alien to me, seeing as building my own craft for each mission is easily the biggest joy in the game.

[Warzouz]

3 hours ago, Arsonide said:

Autostruts were originally a workaround for a Unity issue with wheels in 1.1, they were made available for every part by request from the community, but they are not and never were meant to replace solid vessel engineering and actual strutting. They have many caveats and downsides. This is why they are not fully integrated with the game, and why they are gated behind the advanced tweakables option.

I thought autostruting was designed to make fairing rigidify their internal parts !

Is there something to strut inside fairing ?

[Corona688]

Mods have mostly nixed the ability to share ships anyway.  What I'm concerned about is the ability to actually do things in career mode now that the game's most important engine delivers less thrust at smaller efficiency.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Corona688

[regex]

12 hours ago, JedTech said:

 What we wanted was rockets that aren't so floppy. Why implement such a complex and click-happy solution to the problem?

Because not everyone thinks the rockets are "so floppy". I have zero problems with the current rigidness of craft in stock KSP. Options are good.

12 hours ago, JedTech said:

Please consider the sloppiness that KSP is becoming over the last few updates. It seems like squad has hired several coding minded individuals and lost a few human interface minded individuals. Not everything needs a button and configuration options. It may take more thought towards design, but it is always better to just "make it work" without all of the buttons and options.

Au contraire, KSP is becoming the game it should have been. We're finally getting the information and options we should have had all along, and the current UI design is much, much better than the over-padded, information-starved paradigm we dealt with in previous versions.

[Wahgineer]

@regex is happy? I must be in the wrong Forum!

Edited September 14, 2016 by awsumindyman
Posted on mobile. 'nuff said

[regex]

Just now, awsumindyman said:

@regex is happy? I must be in the wring Forum!

That joke was apropos like, three versions ago.

[Wahgineer]

Just now, regex said:

That joke was apropos like, three versions ago.

Still funny, considering how unhappy you'd get with Squad, as well as with every other forums user who told you to calm down and be patient.

[regex]

Just now, awsumindyman said:

Still funny, considering how unhappy you'd get with Squad, as well as with every other forums user who told you to calm down and be patient.

The new team actually communicates their intentions rather than hiding behind a producer who thought it was better to drop dumb hints on other forums.

[Laie]

"...something that rhymes with schmelta-bee..."

Edited September 14, 2016 by Laie

[FullMetalMachinist]

31 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

But they said they weren't doing the part upgrading thing, I thought.

Not for the stock game, that function is a foundation for mods to work with. And right now the re-done rocket parts are technically a mod. 

32 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

And that does nothing to change my point about the engine being substantially less useful.

It's less useful to begin with. That's the point of the upgrade system. 

[Corona688]

4 minutes ago, FullMetalMachinist said:

Not for the stock game, that function is a foundation for mods to work with. And right now the re-done rocket parts are technically a mod. 

It's less useful to begin with. That's the point of the upgrade system. 

It already was less useful to begin with.  They already nerfed it, over and over.  It's just useful enough to help you started.

Or was.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Corona688