Procedural Parts

[Cheif Operations Director]

I know it's been mentioned before but we are not allowed to revive old threads so I'm picking one...

 

It would be better of the physics engine of we have procedural parts. Instead of having to put together 6 tanks and strutthem and perhaps work out fuel flow one extended tank would work. Perhaps a tweakscale style slider for length width and height. You could make a basic Falcon 9 with 18 parts. 

9 engines

1 plate

2 tanks

2 probe cores

3 decouplers

1 fairing 

Right now its about 30-50 parts due to the lack of procedural parts. Furthur more if you like the things the way they are now then nothing really changes of you. Even just procedural tanks would be nice. Look at the structural tubes and how those work. This seems like a no brainer simple rockets 2 does it and the game runs very well in terms of speed. The extra proceeding speed would be a good thing!

 

 

 

 

Edited March 9, 2019 by Cheif Operations Director
Spelling

[Superfluous J]

They should not just be added, but replace the 847 separate fuel tanks we have now.

[The Aziz]

10 hours ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

I know it's been mentioned before but we are not allowed to revive old threads so I'm picking one...

 

You could make a basic Falcon 9 with 18 parts. 

9 engines

1 plate

2 tanks

2 probe cores

3 decouplers

1 fairing 

 

To make a basic F9 you need like maybe one or two more tanks

Everything below is based on my personal experience and preferences, so keep that in mind before you throw a stone at me;

Seriously - the only reason to introduce procedural tanks is the need to make them suuuuuperlong (like you couldn't use two/three long ones, one more part isn't gonna cook your cpu). Unless you're making something with proportions of a needle, you should be fine. I'd see more use of structural girders being procedural, they're either too small or too big for me. But tanks are in 6 sizes (diameter), most of them also separated into 4 different lengths. Enough for my needs. I really never had to use more than three tanks in a single stage.

[Cheif Operations Director]

3 hours ago, The Aziz said:

To make a basic F9 you need like maybe one or two more tanks

Everything below is based on my personal experience and preferences, so keep that in mind before you throw a stone at me;

Seriously - the only reason to introduce procedural tanks is the need to make them suuuuuperlong (like you couldn't use two/three long ones, one more part isn't gonna cook your cpu). Unless you're making something with proportions of a needle, you should be fine. I'd see more use of structural girders being procedural, they're either too small or too big for me. But tanks are in 6 sizes (diameter), most of them also separated into 4 different lengths. Enough for my needs. I really never had to use more than three tanks in a single stage.

The problem comes with flight control. For example having 6 tanks stacked together requires struts. If you have one booster less parts would need to be processed and the joint problem would not exist.