Space Dock and framerate issues

[HAMsmith]

I started a space dock for assembly of modular interplanetary craft which has caused my first experience with severe framerate issues.

For reference this is the Space Dock with a small RCS tug with a large Interplanetary Craft and lander on the right.

I run an i5 2500K chip, 8 gb RAM, 560ti graphics card. Trying to bring the interplanetary craft into the space dock sent my computer into a crawl.

I had hoped to use the space dock to store several modular components plus many more fuel tanks. At this point I'm going back to the drawing board to reduce part counts and simplify.

Any advice on KSP settings to improve performance? Anti-aliasing on/off, v-sync, physics calcs, etc.

Also with my system should that many parts be slowing KSP down that much?

Thanks,

HAM

[abihoooo]

I always turn V-sync off for any game that I play. Its tends to do more harm than good in my experiences.

[Captain Sierra]

I tried a space dock mission and ran into the same bug. In my case, I had gone part heavy on the tugs and having 4 of them meant lag. V sync off. Anti-aliasing should probably go off. Physics calc should go down a good bit. That will do the most good.

[Amoun]

Welcome to the forum.

This is coming from a lot of personal exp with part count (I tent to go part crazy) and assembly.

First, on performance:

AA-off

V-sync-off

Don't go too fancy with the graphics and textures either (finding a nice balance is easy).

Phys-calc: change it to like 0.03? I think thats the lowest on the right.

For parts:

Try to make a craft around maybe...100-200 parts (the less the better). It will also take trial an error but thats the part count that works very well for me, no problem at all so far.

I am currently assembling a station ...I think about 200-250 parts in total...(for now) and no problem docking with it.

I had a space station core at 450 parts and it was lagging like a mother....forget about docking.

Also do not forget (and a lot of people will say this) that the game is still in Alpha and it is nowhere near optimized and uses 1 core and 4gigs of ram.

I have an i7 with 16 gigs on my laptop and it causes me problems like I mentioned above.

I (we) are hoping that once the game is optimized, we will do much much better. Also, the less parts you have, the better you will get at building as you will get limited and more efficient...trust me.

TL;DR- Try to stay under 120-100 parts per section of anything that you are docking with something else.

Turn off V-sync

Minimum time for physics

Turn of AA

[HeadHunter67]

Also, minimize your use of lights. It should be clear which areas of the station are getting more light than they need.

[Keome]

Minimize the lights. Normally I have just enough lights to mark the docking ports so I can line up for docking. Battery packs also make good markers if you want a part that has a double purpose. Battery packs have lights on them.

To lower the part count, reduce the number of solar panels. You have those 2x3 panels all over. Unless you're using a mod that has something that requires power (Kethane refinery, Ioncross life support, etc.) then you don't need that many solar panels. Two Gigantor arrays generate about 16 power each per second around Kerbin. That's more than enough power unless you're using mods. I use Ioncross Life Support and one Gigantor array will run the station, plus the lights and the oxygen recyclers with an excess of power.

The grid of connectors and docking ports on the left side looks nice, but do you really need that many docking ports? Each one of those girder + connector + docking ports sections adds a lot of parts.

Finally, those radial fuel tanks on the grid structure could be replaced with a single larger tank.

Aesthetics vs. functionality is always hard. Look at current real-life rocket designs. Everything has to fit inside something with fixed dimensions. There is no room for excess. The same applies to KSP.

[HAMsmith]

Thanks for the replies. This is what I came up with for my new space dock:

It still needs tweaking but it is much more in line with both what it needs to do and what my system can handle.

Once more design revamp and I think I'll go primetime with it.

Next will be new minimilist refueling tanker and then new interplanetary ship.

Always a work in progress.

HAM

[Keome]

One sugggestion ... replace those radial monopropellant tanks with a single larger one. Less part count, more monoprop. You can then use it to top off the tanks on your vehicles that dock with the station. Also, it's a lot easier to manage one tank than four.

[Amoun]

Thanks for the replies. This is what I came up with for my new space dock:

It still needs tweaking but it is much more in line with both what it needs to do and what my system can handle.

Once more design revamp and I think I'll go primetime with it.

Next will be new minimilist refueling tanker and then new interplanetary ship.

Always a work in progress.

HAM

There ya go. Also, try to move your RCS as close to an "end" of your craft as possible. ie: move the RCS closer to the engine, they will be more efficient

[Dkmdlb]

As has been said before, instead of using dozens of small parts (such as solar panels), try to use a single larger part. Same for batteries, RCS, lights, etc. Keep RCS ports off the final docking module as much as possible.

As an exercise, in your "updated" one, you could cut the number of RCS ports in half, use a single larger RCS tank instead of a few small ones, use 1 or 2 gigantor solar panels (or even the 1x6 panels) instead of the several thermoelectric generators, and you could probably cut down the number of docking ports (will you ever really have 6 ships docked to the regular-sized ports?). Finally, instead of 3 fuel tanks, you could use 2.

Good job using the larger battery instead of 3 or 4 smaller ones, good job using a single engine instead of several radial engines, and good job using a single Sr. port.

In real life it's money that limits space programs. In KSP it is part counts.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Dkmdlb
for clarity

[HAMsmith]

I forgot to move the RCS thrusters back to the bottom. My first build had the battery between the orange tank and the "dime" tank. After many failed launches where the engine kept falling off I realized you can't put the battery in that location. So I moved the RCS block out of the way during the redesign but forgot to put it back in the right place lol. Better than my usual, i.e. getting to Duna and realizing you have no chutes, etc.

The monoprop is on the redo list for sure. As are the lights. I cannot for the life of me put lights on a ship/station and have them work efficiently. Also I'm going to do an energy audit and see how many of the Nuke spikes I can take off.

[HAMsmith]

Thanks for all the suggestions. This is my final version.

Fits all my needs with 10% of the parts lol.

Final question, can anyone link me to Overbuilders Anonymous?

[HeadHunter67]

Good job! If you don't ever intend to use the engine after docking, you might want to consider a means to decouple it. Better yet, don't give it an engine at all, since you don't want to be cannibalizing payload fuel to get it in orbit, that's defeating the purpose. Take off the engine and put another Senior there, place the payload atop an appropriate lifter, and once you get near the station, decouple the node and tug it into place. That way, you also have a port on the end for further expansion.

As for Overbuilders Anonymous, we meet here on the forums. Daily. 24/7.