Jump to content

0.25 Discussion thread

EnderSpace

By EnderSpace
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sky_walker

Sky_walker

Posted
Posted
the black underside is "gone for good" so I don't think it'll be a tweakable option

Hm... ok, with that quote in mind - yes, it looks like you're right. If so then I have no idea what's up with these parts that do have a black tiles, next to the spaceplane parts that don't have them. Very confusing.

I interpret that twitter response from Squad as the removed black enables inverting the parts without them looking bad together.

I very much doubt that "cool purpose" is "inverting the parts without them looking bad". Call me old-fashioned, but inverted cockpit is far, far away from anything I would call "cool".

I guess/hope that Squad will surprise us with that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r4pt0r

r4pt0r

Posted
Posted
According to Porkjet, the black underside is "gone for good" so I don't think it'll be a tweakable option. I interpret that twitter response from Squad as the removed black enables inverting the parts without them looking bad together.

think that means reentry heat is off the table?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Iron Crown

Red Iron Crown

Posted
Posted
right and without it does that permanently take it off the table? unless they retexture everything?

I don't think the texture is necessary for reentry heat, though it would be a nice touch. Others have suggested some sort of "heatshield painting" during construction, which would be better still.

Honestly I would be surprised if reentry heat/damage doesn't make it into the core game at some point. Just about everyone knows reentry is dangerous, it's counterintuitive for new players to learn that they can just slam into the atmo at any speed/angle with almost no ill effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HafCoJoe

HafCoJoe

Posted
Posted

Maxmaps/Kerbal Space Program answered my question about the ablative bottom. I asked: "What about the missing black under the mk2 parts? They won't match any other Mk1 or Mk3 parts now! Why!" (It was late)

He responded with:

"It's being looked into :D Give us time!"

and

"Trust us, it's for a cool purpose."

I have snips of the conversations in the Squadcast release post but I think I'll be posting everything here now... Anyways I won't be arguing the Mk2 bottom anymore. Thank you so much for the reply!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grimm

Grimm

Posted
Posted

Will contracts be tweaked?

I love their additions, but I'm hoping for them to allign with the program, sort of speaking. Currently the contract system doesn't separate manned mission from unmanned mission to other worlds, giving the same amount of science and money for accomplishing the task either way. Granted, you get a bit more for a surface sample and retrieving experiments, but short of surface sample, you can retrieve science without ever sending the crew. Even then it's not necessary since the entire tech tree can be unlocked and money flow maintained without ever going beyond Duna and Eve. I'm hoping the administration side will play in that part, just to shuffle things around a bit.

Overall, still loving the game, and I've only just began scratching the mods.

PS - First post, been around for a while but I like to watch. I'm creepy that way. So, yeah, hello all.

Grimm, checking out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NFUN

NFUN

Posted
Posted

Welcome officially Grimm! I know this isn't a great answer, but there are already a few contract mods. I think the devs are more focused on adding the Admin building and balancing it than perfecting the contracts we have now. I'd guess that in .26 the new campaign features will be polished almost to completion, if they don't have a different big feature planned. The devs seem to want scope completion first, with all of the finished features, rather than having more processed features released step by step. People have been asking for an improvement on science gathering since .22, besides the new animation they might be adding soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daishi

Daishi

Posted
Posted (edited)
I'm sure people have mentioned this but my take on the secret feature is destructible buildings at KSP. No mod has done this and the only way you encounter this is by crashing into stuff, which, if you play "well," you could never encounter

Don't think so, the guy who made them doesn't work for Squad anymore, and when they were built they were designed as efficiently as possible.

In order to have a building destructible, you need to massively increase the polycount and then apply proper physics to every fragment so it collides and falls against other pieces believably. Have a look at this video - each "shard" would essentially be an individual part of a ship with its own physics calculations, and you know what a 1000 part craft does to the game. It would seem odd to back-peddle on the drive to optimise KSP by including this.

BUT - terrain is naturally flexible, each planet is one physical 'part', and the geometry can already modified on the fly (notice the mountains getting lower and lower poly the further you get from them?). I reckon its some kind of impact cratering system, not destructable buildings. Would be cool to have unmanned craft more meaningful for collecting science ala the Moon Impact Probe.

How often do professional flyers crash into the ground, anyway? :P

Edited by Daishi
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dizzle

Dizzle

Posted
Posted

In order to have a building destructible, you need to massively increase the polycount and then apply proper physics to every fragment so it collides and falls against other pieces believably. Have a look at this video - each "shard" would essentially be an individual part of a ship with its own physics calculations, and you know what a 1000 part craft does to the game. It would seem odd to back-peddle on the drive to optimise KSP by including this.

That's assuming it would even work like that. For all we know it could just change to a "destroyed" state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daishi

Daishi

Posted
Posted
That's assuming it would even work like that. For all we know it could just change to a "destroyed" state.

True. No way to really know until it happens, but at the rate dev is progressing that won't be too far away :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cmdr. Arn1e

Cmdr. Arn1e

Posted
Posted

Random thought; a little while ago, there was talk about dust resulting from the surface ablation from rockets... Don't recall hearing about a mod that does this yet... it would be easily discoverable as soon as you come near ground at many locations with rockets firing, and so not take too long to work out for anyone, and it would be awesome :)

crosses fingers he hasn't just guessed the surprise

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WWEdeadman

WWEdeadman

Posted
Posted
Random thought; a little while ago, there was talk about dust resulting from the surface ablation from rockets... Don't recall hearing about a mod that does this yet... it would be easily discoverable as soon as you come near ground at many locations with rockets firing, and so not take too long to work out for anyone, and it would be awesome :)

crosses fingers he hasn't just guessed the surprise

Doesn't fit the "Good players might not encounter it" statement, but I'd surely like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sky_walker

Sky_walker

Posted
Posted
Don't think so, the guy who made them doesn't work for Squad anymore, and when they were built they were designed as efficiently as possible.

In order to have a building destructible, you need to massively increase the polycount and then apply proper physics to every fragment so it collides and falls against other pieces believably. Have a look at this video - each "shard" would essentially be an individual part of a ship with its own physics calculations, and you know what a 1000 part craft does to the game. It would seem odd to back-peddle on the drive to optimise KSP by including this.

You can't be serious.

If they'd ever implement destructable buiuldings - it would look like that: You hit it above velocity threshold, you see one gigantic particle effect and then small 3D model of destroyed building. That's all. Stop dreaming of realistic destruction modeling, cause we don't have that even for the spacecrafts themselves.

BUT - terrain is naturally flexible, each planet is one physical 'part', and the geometry can already modified on the fly (notice the mountains getting lower and lower poly the further you get from them?). I reckon its some kind of impact cratering system, not destructable buildings. Would be cool to have unmanned craft more meaningful for collecting science ala the Moon Impact Probe.

Yep. That would be nice, and as the guy who originally posted that idea nicely pointed out - it'd be in line with pretty much everything we know of that "secret" feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Polstar

Polstar

Posted
Posted
Doesn't fit the "Good players might not encounter it" statement, but I'd surely like it.

I was talking to a friend about the new feature. One idea i came up with was instead of mechjeb as an auto pilot what if your kerbal was the auto pilot? Depending on courage and stupidity of the kerbal results in how good they fly the rocket / plane.

Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EnderSpace

EnderSpace

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I was talking to a friend about the new feature. One idea i came up with was instead of mechjeb as an auto pilot what if your kerbal was the auto pilot? Depending on courage and stupidity of the kerbal results in how good they fly the rocket / plane.

Just a thought.

I really don't think that it's the new feature , it is nice feature but then space will not be dangerous then there is no adventure , but actually if that feature was in 0.24 I wouldn't kill danly kerbal ;.;

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kasuha

Kasuha

Posted
Posted
One thing I don't understand is why they made a new suit just for cinimatics? They're not a movie company!?

As far as I understand the story, they just made new suit in the course of making cinematics. There's plenty of models in cinematics that don't appear in game. They showed us a screenshot and everybody was like "oooh we're getting a new suit!". So they just noted that it's for cinematics only - likely too high polygon count to be used in game or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sky_walker

Sky_walker

Posted
Posted (edited)
One thing I don't understand is why they made a new suit just for cinimatics? They're not a movie company!?

Yea, they're not. Click "How to improve KSP" link in my signature - you'll see a post that sparked the whole topic titled "Realism in KSP" that right now got 32 pages - one of the things that gave birth this post was our (me, regex and few other people) disappointment in how much devs energy goes into making clips that never make it to the game instead of the game itself.

You really don't want to continue that discussion, cause we'll end up with another 32 pages ;)

I understand that but why go to the trouble of making a model (unless it was easy) when they can focus on something IMPORTANT like new parts or clouds or something like that

Yes, you should really look at that link in my signature :)

Here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90612-0-25-Update%21/page21?p=1376039#post1376039

Edited by Sky_walker
they renamed "Total Realism" to "Realism in KSP", so I updated post to reflect it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...