New Dev Chat Coming Friday

[MechBFP]

37 minutes ago, NexusHelium said:

Now, I'm not one who openly criticizes this game. I personally really enjoy playing it but... I REALLY hope that this dev chat talks about fixing wobbliness. That has been essentially the ONLY thing keeping me away from the game.

Not the lack of content?

[Gargamel]

1 hour ago, MechBFP said:

Not the lack of content?

Each player has their own motivations within the game.    For a newer player, as I believe Nexushelium appears to be, just building and flying at this point might be all they’re  looking  for right now.    Older players, like myself, might be holding off diving into the game until more aspects are worked out.   
It’s probably best for everybody if we don’t presume anybody else’s intentions or motives.    Everybody has the right to post their opinion without being told it’s wrong solely based on somebody else’s personal opinion.   

[Vanamonde]

How are people angry about the content of this thing that doesn't even exist yet? 

[NexusHelium]

2 hours ago, MechBFP said:

Not the lack of content?

Oh no, not at all. Call me crazy but I actually enjoy the anticipations of the new parts. I remember KSP 1 in early access and it had a very similar start (If not a worse one) and that game DID get A LOT better.

1 hour ago, Gargamel said:

For a newer player, as I believe Nexushelium appears to be, just building and flying at this point might be all they’re  looking  for right now

Also no. I am not a new player. I've been playing for 7 years (Along with the fact that I played the early access once or twice.)

[MechBFP]

7 minutes ago, NexusHelium said:

Oh no, not at all. Call me crazy but I actually enjoy the anticipations of the new parts. I remember KSP 1 in early access and it had a very similar start (If not a worse one) and that game DID get A LOT better.

Also no. I am not a new player. I've been playing for 7 years (Along with the fact that I played the early access once or twice.)

As a veteran player I am also looking forward to new things. I personally don't have any issues with wobble, but that is probably because I haven't really bothered to try to build anything larger than a Mun lander since I have never been much of a sandbox player without some sort of in game goal to aim for, so there is little point in building anything large at this point.

[NexusHelium]

4 minutes ago, MechBFP said:

I haven't really bothered to try to build anything larger than a Mun lander

I... cannot say the same...

 

...You don't want to see some of my Jool V rockets.

Edited September 28, 2023 by NexusHelium

[Gargamel]

47 minutes ago, NexusHelium said:

Also no. I am not a new player. I've been playing for 7 years (Along with the fact that I played the early access once or twice.)

Ah my apologies, I had assumed looking at the join date.  

[Mikki]

... on the topic of wobble, i honestly like the way it is. It feels certainly realistic somehow when you think about pushing your sticky contraptions against the low atmosphere. every rocket with exaggerated thrust to weight ratio at launch with full throttle is doomed to bend and buckle.

To overcome this is a basic challenge of this game, and there are still struts, fins and other means available to get the desired object to orbit.

i am looking forward to the next implements and features nonetheless. 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Mikki
you guess it typo

[NexusHelium]

10 minutes ago, Mikki said:

It feels certainly realistic somehow when you think about pushing your sticky contraptions against the low atmosphere.

This may be true but the real problem is how MUCH some people experience it. I myself have built many large craft and still find it extremely difficult to get to space even WITH struts. Fairings in particular seem to effect me (Like with a Saturn V replica I made)

Edited September 28, 2023 by NexusHelium

[Infinite Aerospace]

19 hours ago, Mikki said:

... on the topic of wobble, i honestly like the way it is. It feels certainly realistic somehow when you think about pushing your sticky contraptions against the low atmosphere. every rocket with exaggerated thrust to weight ratio at launch with full throttle is doomed to bend and buckle.

To overcome this is a basic challenge of this game, and there are still struts, fins and other means available to get the desired object to orbit.

i am looking forward to the next implements and features nonetheless. 

The problem with all of that is the wobble isn't a 'challenge' of the game, it's something that shouldn't realistically be there. The issue is the game treating each part as well, a part. So a stack of fuel tanks will ALWAYS be treated as such, instead of a single homogenous stack and that I feel personally is where the game misses the mark.

 

It's meant to be a rocket 'simulation' game but it fails at some of the primary aspects of actual rocketry, that being that a core stage isn't loads of various pieces, it's one piece. I would be all in favour of a 'welding' system where individual tanks could be welded together so the game treats them as a single structure.

 

Then there's the problem with the jelly connections when stage decouplers are involved, there's no real strength to them so struts are just a band-aid to a much more insidious problem. 

[cocoscacao]

26 minutes ago, Infinite Aerospace said:

I feel personally is where the game misses the mark

I still don't get why parts aren't at least somewhat procedural. It was so obvious next step.... 

20 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

...You don't want to see some of my Jool V rockets.

We do? Checking crazy crafts of others is one of the biggest joy of this game for me.

[Kerbart]

30 minutes ago, cocoscacao said:

I still don't get why parts aren't at least somewhat procedural. It was so obvious next step....

In discrete steps, and with limited options,. So you can piece two Jumbo 64's together (or have one of 1.75× length) without losing the "work with the parts you're dealt with" character of the game

58 minutes ago, Infinite Aerospace said:

The problem with all of that is the wobble isn't a 'challenge' of the game, it's something that shouldn't realistically be there. The issue is the game treating each part as well, a part. So a stack of fuel tanks will ALWAYS be treated as such, instead of a single homogenous stack and that I feel personally is where the game misses the mark.

(...)

It's meant to be a rocket 'simulation' game but it fails at some of the primary aspects of actual rocketry, that being that a core stage isn't loads of various pieces, it's one piece. I would be all in favour of a 'welding' system where individual tanks could be welded together so the game treats them as a single structure.

Yes but there are serious game play issues with that since parts themselves have infinite stiffness. What will stop you from welding a stack of 10 Jumbo 64 XL's together? Things do bend in reality (most non-engineers are not aware of this) and doing this through the joints is the only way the game can do it. Part of the challenge, and fun, is that you have to build ships that have at least some structural integrity.

The issue isn't the flexible joints per se but the fact that it happens only at the joints. And then it's exaggerated (a) to compensate for the lack of flex inside parts and (b) to make it visible in the first place, because a 1% flex before things catastrophically come apart isn't really providing hints that a design exceeds what's possible in reality.

Personally I see a couple of ways to combat this:

• Provide other clues that the vessel is starting to exceed stress levels beyond tolerance: screeching sounds, things breaking off, cracks appearing, etc.
• Reduce joint flex bu making parts flexible — model large tanks internally into subdivisions with flexi joints. These joints can be much stiffer than regular part joints as there's no need to compensate for the lack of stiffness inside the parts
• Throw in procedural parts (as above)

There would still be a design penalty for using overly slender tanks with a lot of thrust. Technically, wobbling could be eliminated — you'd hear screeching, cracks appear, the tank visibly bends, and then it explodes. Although under less extreme circumstances — say a large cylindrical tank foolishly used as a structural part for a space station — you'd still encounter bending but non-fatal (a metal-fatigue tracker would be an interesting but likely overly complex addition to the game, but that's where modders come in).

The downside, and not an insignificant one given the performance issues the game has, is that an approach like this could effectively increase the part count of a vessel significantly as all large parts will likely be subdivided.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Kerbart

[Stephensan]

New Dev Chat In A Few, From Mike.

[cocoscacao]

16 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

In discrete steps, and with limited options

That's what I was thinking. Structural tube in KSP 1 has that behaviour (for length). It lowers the part count on the rocket, it lowers the clutter in selection inventory and it automatically gives you every combination for every part (angry look at payload bay variety).  

Edited September 29, 2023 by cocoscacao

[Mikki]

3 hours ago, Infinite Aerospace said:

Snip...

Then there's the problem with the jelly connections when stage decouplers are involved, there's no real strength to them so struts are just a band-aid to a much more insidious problem. 

I agree on this as you desctibe it on the present state of 0.1.4.

However, thrust to weight at launch is simulated quite accurate depending on altitude, drag, and attitude of a rocket feasible in reality, at least in my opinion.

Good points from other perspective nonetheless.

2 hours ago, Kerbart said:

In discrete steps, and with limited options,. So you can piece two Jumbo 64's together (or have one of 1.75× length) without losing the "work with the parts you're dealt with" character of the game

Yes but there are serious game play issues with that since parts themselves have infinite stiffness. What will stop you from welding a stack of 10 Jumbo 64 XL's .... snip

Actually the BEST post on this issue since i read this Forum.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Mikki
typos sorry, BEST omg

[Vanamonde]

Here's the dev chat.