Kerbal Space Program v9 - "Escape Rocket" Hat DLC, only £0.99! - Games

[QUOTE=Zeneros;40277359]Anyone have a copy of the kethane mod? Spaceport and the forums are down[/QUOTE] [url=https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14106901/Kethane-0.4.3.zip]Kethane 0.4.3[/Url]

[t]http://puu.sh/2zX57/ecf6a7c967[/t] Space Shuttle mod I'm working on, model is one of NASA's free to use ones, I am aware it is too small, easy fix

Why does the game think the front of my ship is the back of it? Shit got flipped around after i docked my 2 pieces together. How can i change it?

[QUOTE=LordApocca;40278109]Why does the game think the front of my ship is the back of it? Shit got flipped around after i docked my 2 pieces together. How can i change it?[/QUOTE] Right click on the command pod or docking port you want to fly the ship from and select "Control from here."

Fucking forums are down so I can't find this info, how do I make ailerons for my mod work? do I need to add a certain gameObject to make them move?

[QUOTE=skeligandrew;40278441]Fucking forums are down so I can't find this info, how do I make ailerons for my mod work? do I need to add a certain gameObject to make them move?[/QUOTE] look at one of the control surfaces part.cfg to see what modules it uses

Now that being on the dark side of a planet actually means something, I decided to light up the launch pad so it's not so dark and boring looking at night. [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/3fdddcc047059372d591e42f57c9f0ee/tumblr_ml982n63c01r9waklo1_1280.png[/t] [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/23bf50d6a82c9cce19d1aa20ea8b5d0e/tumblr_ml982n63c01r9waklo2_1280.png[/t]

Ugh, 3 days and the forums are still down. Come on, guys.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40278662]look at one of the control surfaces part.cfg to see what modules it uses[/QUOTE] I've got that copied from Buran aileron config but no movement, I think I have to define the axis in unity

[QUOTE=Mattk50;40277124]i asked this on the ksp forums, the reply i got was that it's possible to "jump" through planets at high enough speed and that being on the stage view (as opposed to the map view) at such high speed would cause tearing on the planet's graphics. Its pretty silly though because you can just switch to another landed ship to time warp however you want.[/QUOTE] I imagine it's because the game has to keep up with loading the terrain at a high detail It doesn't have to load anything at all if you're time warping on the surface, but in a low orbit you move across the surface at quite a speed

I am so glad I made an RCS tug for contingencies on the station. Yesterday, after adding one of the large fuel tanks along with docking ports to accommodate for more, I noticed I did something wrong. I put the docking ports in the wrong places. I spent more time than I want to admit getting that orange tank up there and docked, so I wasn’t about to take it off and de-orbit it. Instead, using the tug I had sitting on my station, I detached the tank and it’s connectors. I noticed that if I flipped the piece around, the ports would still be easily and safely usable. The orange tank has it’s own RCS thrusters, despite not carrying any fuel. With the tug attached, it could use fuel from the tug, and it make the whole thing pretty balanced and easy to re-attach. In the last picture you can see the flipped orange tank and its connectors. [t]http://25.media.tumblr.com/9b609311cb040b5c99d9722095519a27/tumblr_ml9c34MYGA1r9waklo1_1280.png[/t] [t]http://25.media.tumblr.com/f6d65c946720135f327cadc67932251c/tumblr_ml9c34MYGA1r9waklo2_1280.png[/t] [t]http://25.media.tumblr.com/d3517df0faf3047a818c113c50c07660/tumblr_ml9c34MYGA1r9waklo3_1280.png[/t] [t]http://24.media.tumblr.com/191df169ee2bc173eb93c75ecdf529f7/tumblr_ml9c34MYGA1r9waklo4_1280.png[/t]

[QUOTE=Tommyx50;40276605]Time acceleration could only really get a bit better, as Bullet has continous physics detection, so even if you would in theory fly through something in a single frame (as time warp can make happen), you'd still collide with it. With big or heavy parts, I don't see why stuff would get much worse barring the Kraken. Oh also, about the Kraken and floating origin: that was all workarounds needed because of PhysX lack of available source. It was mostly an engine designed for FPS games, so it uses single precision floating point values, which causes extreme precision issues. If using Bullet, in theory Squad could've jumped into the code, changed the precision to double precision, and that would be more than enough. Double precision would give an accuracy of about 1cm from the distance of the sun to pluto, and considering KSPs 1/11 scale, it'd allow them to avoid all that work. In terms of speed, PhysX is actually slightly faster than Bullet depending on the circumstances judging from online tests. If a single cube was falling in a test scenario, then Newton physics was the fastest (by far), Bullet was in the middle, and PhysX lagged behind a whole lot... However, on a test case with 4000 cubes and a plane to collide with, PhysX was fastest, Bullet was only a little behind, and Newtons was very very very slow. I can't find the source for this, so you are just going to need to take my word for it. Of interesting note, Bullet could become a lot lot faster than PhysX, at least in Unity, when the GPU accelerated version is finalized. PhysX already has such acceleration but limited it to Nvidia cards, even taking the time to specifically disable it on mixed cards systems. Due to this, or perhaps other reasons, Unity doesn't support PhysX hardware acceleration. Because Bullet should in theory work on all cards, if it were implemented into Unity we could get GPU acceleration. However, it is not up for any devs or us to decide. Implementing Bullet in Unity's scripting system would be very slow, and anyways, it's in the wrong language. [B]Bullet is written in C++, while Unity supports just Javascript and C#. If it's going to be implemented, it'll need to be done by Unity's devs, right into Unity itself.[/B][/QUOTE] Actually the Rawbots devs have found a way to use bullet physics in their unity based game: [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Z23SvOwwyJ0[/URL] And it's a great example of how much better the constraints would be in KSP if it were to use bullet physics. It's a lot of work to implement it though..

Seeing how KSP only uses PhysX through an interface (i.e., they haven't edited the source code), then transferring over another physics system should be mostly just translation, rather than having to re-implement functionality. Also, I've never used Unity, but generally engines don't impose constraints that would stop you from replacing some subsystem with something else (and this is evidenced in the video above), so there's nothing stopping the KSP devs from simply doing interop between their language and bullet's C++ (Which is particularly easy in C#, from personal experience [Does anyone know what language KSP is written in?]). Although that would probably be unnecessary, because a cursory google search suggests people have already put together wrapper libraries for Bullet. But in the end, I imagine the KSP dev's are more interested in coding features than doing a long boring transfer, and additionally, there may be benefits to PhysX that are stopping them. I personally think that right now, performance should actually be their main concern, because in my experience performance issues are the #1 drain on my fun when playing KSP.

My only problem is that KSP crashes if I try to do more than one launch per game. At all. Like, I can edit all I want, but only one launch or the game crashes.

If .20 had lots of performance and bug fixes and no new content at all I would be ok with that

I'd pay again for a better optimized ksp

I'd pay way more than that. Also a better fucking settings menu, or proper documentation on docking in general, I have no fucking clue what the dock button is.

hey c7, get squad to optimize the game please i don't want my relatively small space stations to cause me to get 2fps.

[QUOTE=draugur;40281593]I'd pay way more than that. Also a better fucking settings menu, or proper documentation on docking in general, I have no fucking clue what the dock button is.[/QUOTE] There isn't one?

[QUOTE=draugur;40281593]I'd pay way more than that. Also a better fucking settings menu, or proper documentation on docking in general, I have no fucking clue what the dock button is.[/QUOTE] there is no dock button

bottom left corner next to the pitch, roll, yaw indicators?

docking is magic [editline]14th April 2013[/editline] that's the docking mode tho

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40281686]bottom left corner next to the pitch, roll, yaw indicators?[/QUOTE] That's docking control mode.

idk maybe that's what he was talking about when he said "dock button"??? i'm just taking a guess.

so, didn't they say any purchases made before the end of April will get the "every dlc and update free" thing, right? Exams end the week before the end of April and I can return books that week and get lods emone.

[t]http://puu.sh/2AbOw/f6f502bfe3[/t] My shuttle on the bottom, I need to scale it down a bit

[QUOTE=latin_geek;40281468]I'd pay again for a better optimized ksp[/QUOTE] Oh yeah, I'd pay $20 in a second to stop KSP from lagging like shit for even a small base.

*Squad sells optimization DLC for 20$* rip ksp

[QUOTE=ryandaniels;40282011]*Squad sells optimization DLC for 20$* rip ksp[/QUOTE] OMG CALL REDDIT WE NEED TO PETITION SQUAD TO NOT DO THIS

Guys, I made this small list of mods: [url]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ap9E4RvAlvw4dDdFcE5xdW5RMFdUeURzaHhwdTNvY0E&usp=sharing[/url] please expand if you have the time EDIT: Seriously screw you guys you are worse than the KSP community, that's a difficult task