@plane918273645 LOL 🤣 even if it did, it wouldn't matter anyway since there's no reason to orbit over the same spot on it's surface anyway(there's no sunspots to count unlike irl)
Hmmmmm... Is there supposed to be something here? This is the second post by this account with a non-informative name and nothing else. Is this a spambot or something?
@Chtite451SR2 I wanted to start ride share early on in my time here, but decided against it partly because of the high supply and low demand, partly because players like iSpace already dominate the market, and partly because I want to refine my LVs and methods before getting into that. I feel like I'd be better off treating it like a real life company where you have to first develop your LV and make sure it's actually ready to go before taking on contracts for rideshare, etc
I mean, it's not like nobody here likes war, we just don't want to start one unnecessarily. The rhetoric used is more like that of MAD-- "we don't want to blow up the world, but we will if you make us".
And if you're bored with the game then try to make up some kind of ridiculous challenge. Or make something that hasn't been made before. Or upgrade something someone else made. Or create your own campaign mode to play through. Idk, but if you can't find a solution, then maybe this isn't the game for you(this is coming from someone who has themself been bored of this game and gotten out of it)
Maybe your map view settings are too low? Try turning the map view settings all the way up? I think there's an option to show high quality planets there, but it might be elsewhere in graphics settings
@Schaden As cool as that sounds, I have close ties to Chtite451SR2 (not only am I employed by him, we have various business arrangements to maintain), and so have to decline the offer to develop weapons which may (or may not) be used against him. Also, I have no desire to annihilate Droo, however, I will defend it at all costs!
@PasonJawulo np! And if there's anything I've learned from studying animation(both 2d and 3d), it's that the details are irrelevant (and generally unnecessary) as long as everything else works right. There's no point in rendering every little detail on a model that you'll never be close enough to even see the details on anyway. I think what makes your replica so great is the fact that you've included nearly everything that makes Starship what it is without wasting time on the details that don't affect functionality and probably wouldn't be noticed by most observers anyway. In the world of engineering, the go to ideology is "what can I take away from this without negatively affecting my design" as opposed to "what can I add to this to make it better".
As much as I want to build my own, I see posts like this of Starship, F9, or other LVs and realize I'd be waaaay better off just using one of the masterpieces made by someone else.
That looks nearly photorealistic(I realize it can't be perfect, but it's still close enough), and I'm in awe at your abilities with this game. Great work! I'm looking forward to the finished product
As a matter of fact, yes you actually can! Granted, it takes a bit of ingenuity and luck, but it's definitely a viable way to make reusable craft. I don't know most of the specifics, but I've seen examples by @Chtite451SR2 and @ChaoticGraviton that use docking ports in this manner. I would check out what they've made for some ideas, especially Chao's "True Reuse Falcon 9" since it was the first proven reuse of a first stage, relying on docking ports for refueling, etc. It also uses a strong back for assembly of the reused booster and new second stage, plus reorientation on the launchpad. Come to think of it, I believe @iSpace made a very similar reuse system (there was an unofficial competition to see who could do it first a few months back and iSpace was barely behind Chaos), but I'm not sure if it was ever uploaded
Something I notice isn't mentioned(at least not directly) is that if your craft is behind the body in question, then you'll get a relative boost in speed. If you're craft is ahead of the body, then you'll lose speed relatively. If used in the right combination, you can maneuver across the system with a minimal amount of ∆v regardless of the destination
@HorizonsTechnologies I think they mean that eventually it'll fall to the wayside as newer, better looking games come out and take over. Think about some of the biggest franchises out there right now. Chances are, most of the first few installments in each have nearly non-existent player bases, and no support or dedicated servers or anything at this point, despite having been at the top of the charts earlier on. Even somewhat recent games have had all support and stuff removed because the community moves on to the next big thing. Granted now, SP probably won't go away anytime soon, but eventually a game like SR2(or possibly an SP2) will attract what's left of the community around SP. Also, once continued development on a game ends, its usually only a matter of time before people move on to something that's still being worked on
I think DrexxVolv is right(although I have no experience with SP). It also doesn't help that in SR2 it takes 3-6 wing parts to make a single fully functional wing(you can use a single wing part, but it doesn't work as well). Also, I think this game asks for more, so the players give it more(in terms of complexity)
@CarolusRix No problemo! Yeah, the engineering and dynamics aspects of this game are what draw me in and keep me here. I like the idea that I can make fully functional systems in this game for a number of uses, using the same basic parts, and constrained only by my creativity and knowledge of the game mechanics.
You'd probably really like Vizzy (the built in visual programming language) like I do. I'll admit it's kind of a pain(especially if you have no experience with code), but it can be used in a remarkably similar way to irl flight computers, allowing for fully autonomous launch/landing of rockets, and soooo much more. The drawback is that there's a very steep learning curve, and certain functions are impossible to implement without the addition of sensors and instruments to the list of parts we can build with.
And yeah, the maneuver gizmo is hard to figure out, and hard to use even after you do. I know they've done a lot of work with it recently, but the ui hasn't changed much in general for awhile. Hopefully they can figure out a better way to do it, or at least adjust the ui and stuff so it's more friendly(especially on mobile since the touch controls are ridiculous sometimes)
Hmmmm. I want to help you, but I'm not sure myself if there's another or better way to do what you want. At least, not something that doesn't take forever and a day to make work in the first place(vizzy I'm looking at you🧐). I wouldn't be surprised if someone hasn't made something using vizzy to simplify the process, but I also wouldn't be surprised if that's just outside the scope of what people are willing to do with this game.
It really amazes me how different this game is from KSP in more than just a visual sense. I noticed a post the other day on reddit complaining about the lack of input sliders in KSP, while this game has had them for awhile. Maybe the system in KSP is more intuitive or something, but idk since I've never played it
You basically want all of your graphics settings at low or off. Definitely turn shadows, reflections, and water completely off(it doesn't completely remove them from the game, but it uses waaaay less RAM). The only graphics settings that kinda have to be high are for structures otherwise they won't display properly. You can also leave your physics settings at medium or high, but you might want to go with low depending on how you feel
@mambamambo69 Beat me to it! Thanks for the good answer, but it does help if you use a clickable link(yes you can do that in comments, just no pictures or gifs for some reason)
@Rocketron yeah, I'd use the Post Formatting Guide to get familiar with how to format your links into pictures and stuff. There's a few other things you can do that aren't on the formatting guide, but you probably won't need those anyway(I definitely don't).
@Rocketron You're on the wrong part of the site for that. You don't post videos to the forums, you have to go to the video tab on the site, then click the blue create button. From there it pops up a window that you past your link into and add a title, etc. I also think your YT has to be verified, but that's pretty easy(unless you break the rules too much and get banned).
While I wish I could take advantage of this, I'm a little beyond the point of being in school. Besides, I already paid for SR2 on both mobile and pc, so it doesn't matter anyway, and both games(SR2 and SP) are reasonably priced as it is.
Still, I have to say that I really appreciate the dev team doing this, since programs like this definitely made school a lot more interesting. I wish these games were a part of my schooling since they would have been useful for soooo many things in different classes(math, physics, engineering, programming, etc).
Keep up the amazing work! I look forward to the future of this game! Thanks
@Matteovir well, I think Smurf research might be right, the accuracy would definitely go down as your craft orbits the planet because your directional velocity changes a lot and a long duration burn gives more time for small inaccuracies to compound into much larger ones. Half a degree difference in heading is only a few feet at a range of less than a mile, but a 1000 miles, it becomes over a mile of difference, and when you're actively changing course during that path, the difference is potentially even larger.
Also, RSS might not cooperate very well with the burn node tool. I think it's optimized for the stock Droo system, so an RSS system might push it just a little farther than it was meant to
You do that in the game. You open the game menu while you're in the designer or flight mode, and it has a row of little square buttons with symbols. There's one that looks like a square with an arrow pointing up, that's to upload button, but it only works for crafts, structures, systems(and bodies like planets etc), and save games specifically. You can upload programs and stuff too, but it has to be uploaded as part of a craft or whatever
Probably. If you need 4000 m/s ∆v, but your craft only has 3500 m/s, the burn node will be very accurate up to the point that your fuel would run out, then it's accuracy goes down because you would be drifting around without any way to maneuver(unless you have rcs or something). The only real fix is to increase your available ∆v by optimizing your craft. I can't tell you what would work on your specific craft, but I would try removing any dead weight, increasing engine performance, and improving aerodynamics if the craft goes through the atmosphere
YES!!! Keep up the amazing reporting man! I was starting to wonder if you'd lost interest, but apparently you were just waiting for something worth reporting on.
I'll let you know now, that I only upvoted this post because SupremeDorian is my friend, and leader of our upvote cult!!!
Lol jkjk thanks for the post explaining how that works and why it's bad. I sorta come close to that, except that I don't just upvote any post by friends of mine, but if they post something good, then I'll definitely upvote. Also, I try to upvote some lower quality stuff since beginners won't get any upvotes otherwise, unless they post super high quality stuff, but I try to make sure it's someone who deserves it(like the guy who's been on this site for 3 months and still can't post pictures, etc.)
@seventeen lol it's cool. And yeah, I'm not trying to rush anything, I'd rather take a few more weeks or months to perfect my designs and learn vizzy a bit more(I'm surprising myself with how much I've managed to learn so far). The Sounding Rocket I posted recently was just a small piece of a larger project(I thought it might be easier to practice programming a simpler rocket before trying to do it with my main rockets I've been working on. Before all that though, I've found a few designing/programming projects that I can take advantage of to hone my skills along the way.
@FoxtrotTheSergal agreed. I got some really cool projects in the works, but it's been hard to find the time with my busy work schedule. I'm developing something that I believe has never been tried before, as well as developing a prototype SPMT, among other things
*Petition
+1 3.1 years ago@plane918273645 LOL 🤣 even if it did, it wouldn't matter anyway since there's no reason to orbit over the same spot on it's surface anyway(there's no sunspots to count unlike irl)
3.1 years agoHello? Anybody home?
3.1 years agoHmmmmm... Is there supposed to be something here? This is the second post by this account with a non-informative name and nothing else. Is this a spambot or something?
+2 3.1 years ago@Chtite451SR2 I wanted to start ride share early on in my time here, but decided against it partly because of the high supply and low demand, partly because players like iSpace already dominate the market, and partly because I want to refine my LVs and methods before getting into that. I feel like I'd be better off treating it like a real life company where you have to first develop your LV and make sure it's actually ready to go before taking on contracts for rideshare, etc
3.1 years agoYeah, what Horizons said! But I think you also need to make a WordPress account in order to make a Gravatar account
3.1 years agoYou talk a big game! But can you deliver, Mister Bond?🧐 If I'm not truly impressed, I'm gonna have to report you for false advertising!
Jk lol 🤣
Or am I?...
+2 3.1 years agoI mean, it's not like nobody here likes war, we just don't want to start one unnecessarily. The rhetoric used is more like that of MAD-- "we don't want to blow up the world, but we will if you make us".
And if you're bored with the game then try to make up some kind of ridiculous challenge. Or make something that hasn't been made before. Or upgrade something someone else made. Or create your own campaign mode to play through. Idk, but if you can't find a solution, then maybe this isn't the game for you(this is coming from someone who has themself been bored of this game and gotten out of it)
+1 3.1 years ago@Schaden ever heard of the Kraken?
3.1 years ago@Schaden ever heard of the Kraken?
3.1 years agoNo worries, I love that band! 🥸
Maybe your map view settings are too low? Try turning the map view settings all the way up? I think there's an option to show high quality planets there, but it might be elsewhere in graphics settings
3.1 years ago@BellKitsu planet studio also works on mobile. It's just harder to use because of the controls, hence why most people don't bother without a PC
3.1 years ago@Schaden not sure, but it sounds painful XP
3.1 years ago@Schaden As cool as that sounds, I have close ties to Chtite451SR2 (not only am I employed by him, we have various business arrangements to maintain), and so have to decline the offer to develop weapons which may (or may not) be used against him. Also, I have no desire to annihilate Droo, however, I will defend it at all costs!
+1 3.1 years ago@Schaden Hopefully I'll have my FOBS ready to go by then!
3.1 years ago@PasonJawulo np! And if there's anything I've learned from studying animation(both 2d and 3d), it's that the details are irrelevant (and generally unnecessary) as long as everything else works right. There's no point in rendering every little detail on a model that you'll never be close enough to even see the details on anyway. I think what makes your replica so great is the fact that you've included nearly everything that makes Starship what it is without wasting time on the details that don't affect functionality and probably wouldn't be noticed by most observers anyway. In the world of engineering, the go to ideology is "what can I take away from this without negatively affecting my design" as opposed to "what can I add to this to make it better".
+1 3.1 years agoAs much as I want to build my own, I see posts like this of Starship, F9, or other LVs and realize I'd be waaaay better off just using one of the masterpieces made by someone else.
That looks nearly photorealistic(I realize it can't be perfect, but it's still close enough), and I'm in awe at your abilities with this game. Great work! I'm looking forward to the finished product
3.1 years agoAs a matter of fact, yes you actually can! Granted, it takes a bit of ingenuity and luck, but it's definitely a viable way to make reusable craft. I don't know most of the specifics, but I've seen examples by @Chtite451SR2 and @ChaoticGraviton that use docking ports in this manner. I would check out what they've made for some ideas, especially Chao's "True Reuse Falcon 9" since it was the first proven reuse of a first stage, relying on docking ports for refueling, etc. It also uses a strong back for assembly of the reused booster and new second stage, plus reorientation on the launchpad. Come to think of it, I believe @iSpace made a very similar reuse system (there was an unofficial competition to see who could do it first a few months back and iSpace was barely behind Chaos), but I'm not sure if it was ever uploaded
3.1 years agoWell, it's a good thing I'm working on my A-SAT program! I'll be prepared... 😏
3.1 years agoSomething I notice isn't mentioned(at least not directly) is that if your craft is behind the body in question, then you'll get a relative boost in speed. If you're craft is ahead of the body, then you'll lose speed relatively. If used in the right combination, you can maneuver across the system with a minimal amount of ∆v regardless of the destination
+1 3.1 years agoMessage error. 404 page not found
3.1 years ago@HorizonsTechnologies I think they mean that eventually it'll fall to the wayside as newer, better looking games come out and take over. Think about some of the biggest franchises out there right now. Chances are, most of the first few installments in each have nearly non-existent player bases, and no support or dedicated servers or anything at this point, despite having been at the top of the charts earlier on. Even somewhat recent games have had all support and stuff removed because the community moves on to the next big thing. Granted now, SP probably won't go away anytime soon, but eventually a game like SR2(or possibly an SP2) will attract what's left of the community around SP. Also, once continued development on a game ends, its usually only a matter of time before people move on to something that's still being worked on
3.1 years agoNot sure, but I can help look into it. I'd be interested to know how this goes, since that would help me with a few ideas I've had
+1 3.1 years ago"I... CAN'T EVEN!..."
+1 3.1 years agoCould also just be that the first thing anyone thinks of when they think background music for Mars happens to be the same thing for the same reason
3.1 years agoI think DrexxVolv is right(although I have no experience with SP). It also doesn't help that in SR2 it takes 3-6 wing parts to make a single fully functional wing(you can use a single wing part, but it doesn't work as well). Also, I think this game asks for more, so the players give it more(in terms of complexity)
3.1 years ago@CarolusRix No problemo! Yeah, the engineering and dynamics aspects of this game are what draw me in and keep me here. I like the idea that I can make fully functional systems in this game for a number of uses, using the same basic parts, and constrained only by my creativity and knowledge of the game mechanics.
You'd probably really like Vizzy (the built in visual programming language) like I do. I'll admit it's kind of a pain(especially if you have no experience with code), but it can be used in a remarkably similar way to irl flight computers, allowing for fully autonomous launch/landing of rockets, and soooo much more. The drawback is that there's a very steep learning curve, and certain functions are impossible to implement without the addition of sensors and instruments to the list of parts we can build with.
And yeah, the maneuver gizmo is hard to figure out, and hard to use even after you do. I know they've done a lot of work with it recently, but the ui hasn't changed much in general for awhile. Hopefully they can figure out a better way to do it, or at least adjust the ui and stuff so it's more friendly(especially on mobile since the touch controls are ridiculous sometimes)
3.1 years agoHmmmm. I want to help you, but I'm not sure myself if there's another or better way to do what you want. At least, not something that doesn't take forever and a day to make work in the first place(vizzy I'm looking at you🧐). I wouldn't be surprised if someone hasn't made something using vizzy to simplify the process, but I also wouldn't be surprised if that's just outside the scope of what people are willing to do with this game.
It really amazes me how different this game is from KSP in more than just a visual sense. I noticed a post the other day on reddit complaining about the lack of input sliders in KSP, while this game has had them for awhile. Maybe the system in KSP is more intuitive or something, but idk since I've never played it
+2 3.1 years agoYa know, Scott Manley is the only reason I even found out about this game!
3.1 years agoLol XP
3.1 years agoYou basically want all of your graphics settings at low or off. Definitely turn shadows, reflections, and water completely off(it doesn't completely remove them from the game, but it uses waaaay less RAM). The only graphics settings that kinda have to be high are for structures otherwise they won't display properly. You can also leave your physics settings at medium or high, but you might want to go with low depending on how you feel
3.1 years ago@mambamambo69 Beat me to it! Thanks for the good answer, but it does help if you use a clickable link(yes you can do that in comments, just no pictures or gifs for some reason)
+1 3.1 years ago@Rocketron yeah, I'd use the Post Formatting Guide to get familiar with how to format your links into pictures and stuff. There's a few other things you can do that aren't on the formatting guide, but you probably won't need those anyway(I definitely don't).
3.1 years ago@Rocketron You're on the wrong part of the site for that. You don't post videos to the forums, you have to go to the video tab on the site, then click the blue create button. From there it pops up a window that you past your link into and add a title, etc. I also think your YT has to be verified, but that's pretty easy(unless you break the rules too much and get banned).
3.1 years agoWhile I wish I could take advantage of this, I'm a little beyond the point of being in school. Besides, I already paid for SR2 on both mobile and pc, so it doesn't matter anyway, and both games(SR2 and SP) are reasonably priced as it is.
Still, I have to say that I really appreciate the dev team doing this, since programs like this definitely made school a lot more interesting. I wish these games were a part of my schooling since they would have been useful for soooo many things in different classes(math, physics, engineering, programming, etc).
Keep up the amazing work! I look forward to the future of this game! Thanks
3.1 years agoLivin' up ta the name dere! Looks like part of a particle accelerator
3.2 years agoAnd it really does look better than the original!
3.4 years agoIt's not perfect, but Oh My God I WANT ONE!!!
3.4 years agoUmmmmmmm.... What is this? Why are you posting about Nematodes? This is a site about building rockets, not investing in tiny worm genocide
3.4 years ago@Siddh no problemo! And welcome to the SR community too by the way 🙋
3.4 years ago@Matteovir well, I think Smurf research might be right, the accuracy would definitely go down as your craft orbits the planet because your directional velocity changes a lot and a long duration burn gives more time for small inaccuracies to compound into much larger ones. Half a degree difference in heading is only a few feet at a range of less than a mile, but a 1000 miles, it becomes over a mile of difference, and when you're actively changing course during that path, the difference is potentially even larger.
Also, RSS might not cooperate very well with the burn node tool. I think it's optimized for the stock Droo system, so an RSS system might push it just a little farther than it was meant to
3.4 years agoYou do that in the game. You open the game menu while you're in the designer or flight mode, and it has a row of little square buttons with symbols. There's one that looks like a square with an arrow pointing up, that's to upload button, but it only works for crafts, structures, systems(and bodies like planets etc), and save games specifically. You can upload programs and stuff too, but it has to be uploaded as part of a craft or whatever
3.4 years agoProbably. If you need 4000 m/s ∆v, but your craft only has 3500 m/s, the burn node will be very accurate up to the point that your fuel would run out, then it's accuracy goes down because you would be drifting around without any way to maneuver(unless you have rcs or something). The only real fix is to increase your available ∆v by optimizing your craft. I can't tell you what would work on your specific craft, but I would try removing any dead weight, increasing engine performance, and improving aerodynamics if the craft goes through the atmosphere
3.4 years agoDefinitely count me in! I wanna see what that baby can do on my new PC!!
3.4 years agoYES!!! Keep up the amazing reporting man! I was starting to wonder if you'd lost interest, but apparently you were just waiting for something worth reporting on.
+2 3.4 years agoI'll let you know now, that I only upvoted this post because SupremeDorian is my friend, and leader of our upvote cult!!!
Lol jkjk thanks for the post explaining how that works and why it's bad. I sorta come close to that, except that I don't just upvote any post by friends of mine, but if they post something good, then I'll definitely upvote. Also, I try to upvote some lower quality stuff since beginners won't get any upvotes otherwise, unless they post super high quality stuff, but I try to make sure it's someone who deserves it(like the guy who's been on this site for 3 months and still can't post pictures, etc.)
+9 3.4 years ago@seventeen lol it's cool. And yeah, I'm not trying to rush anything, I'd rather take a few more weeks or months to perfect my designs and learn vizzy a bit more(I'm surprising myself with how much I've managed to learn so far). The Sounding Rocket I posted recently was just a small piece of a larger project(I thought it might be easier to practice programming a simpler rocket before trying to do it with my main rockets I've been working on. Before all that though, I've found a few designing/programming projects that I can take advantage of to hone my skills along the way.
+1 3.4 years ago@RamenNoodlesXVII exactly. But it's in there somewhere. I've turned it off before, but I still need it sometimes so I just leave it on
3.5 years agoIt's called tooltips and it's in your UI settings under the basic tab in the settings menu
3.5 years ago@FoxtrotTheSergal agreed. I got some really cool projects in the works, but it's been hard to find the time with my busy work schedule. I'm developing something that I believe has never been tried before, as well as developing a prototype SPMT, among other things
+2 3.5 years ago