I like the idea, though i could see some potential issues with that. The powder toy works with cellular automata as far as i know, so the individual pixels just appear/dissappear depending on certain rules and the pixels around them. This does allow for some pretty impressive looking simulations but is really gpu expensive, even at a 2dimensional and low resolution scale. I couldnt imagine how bad the framerate would be with a 3d implementation. That said, im sure there would be ways to solve this to some degree, i sadly just dont see the devs ever actually picking that idea up.
@superTT SP is way more matured as a product than SR2, and anyways its not even officially released, its still in early access. And even if SR2 just doesnt become profitable anymore, they might just stop bringing out new updates but the game will never dissappear.
I'm having a problem when trying to implementing a message dialog. When i tried to call the CreateMessageDialog function when setting the local 'd' variable it throws an error saying it wants a string instead of the 'true'.
Edit: Nevermind, i figured out that you need to specifiy the type instead of just writing true. I guess this was changed from whenever the tutorial was made.
@hendore there actually is a stock droneship on the standart planet, its in the ocean somewhere. Some people have made their own droneships aswell which can be spawned in after setting the proper launch location.
The devs are trying to get the two versions to be as similar as possible and besides mods (which just wouldnt be possible) and planet studio, the mobile version has basically all the same features as the pc version.
@JelloAircraftCorporation no, the game uses patched conics, not n-body physics. It would be too confusing for new players and maybe also too performace heavy. I think in ksp theres a mod for it but not for sr2.
@Silentime in real life you would have a legrange point between earth and moon, that would always be above the same point over the moon as the moon is locked and the legrange point moves with the moon.
I looked at the planet file and the rotational period seems to be ca. 104 hours. So it seems unreasonable that a luna-stationary orbit would be possible. I might try to fully calculate it later, but you could try to do it youself aswell, the formulas should be easily found with a google search.
Noone knows any more than you besides the devs themselves. There's gonna be quite a few pretty big features in the next version, so just be patient, asking about it wont make it go faster.
I think there is a 'parent ancestry id' vaule in the xml-file of the craft that determines if something will be credited. So before uploading copy the id of the original craft and paste it into your craft file.
@CSPACE yeah an SSTO would be way easier in that regard, i guess you have to decide if you'd rather sacrifice a bit of payload capacity or your sanity.
@CSPACE cool, im was just asking, cause its been quite a struggle getting the all the systems to work, from retrieveing the booster and upper stage, refueling them and then restacking them. What i now need to do is find a way to attach a new payload. I wish you good luck for your own endeavours.
You copy the link to the other craft and then write in the description: [the thing to display](link) [example](https://www.simplerockets.com/Forums) example
For more information go here.
@Politonno well no, sadly. Mods dont work on the mobile version and you need the mods to download the craft, but they are really useful for making realistic crafts.
There are quite a few really big features in the works right now, just keep looking on the roadmap to see any progress, asking when it will release wont make it go faster.
You could make your own flat area in the planet xml. I belive there's a planet modifier that makes a round flat area at a certain position on the planet like on the stock space center.
@QarabinaKa if you're on pc, you could also get sflanker's improved docking port mod and just use 2 docking ports on each module so it has to dock at a fixed angle.
One option would be to put a camera in the docking port and some small blocks as markings and then align it when docking. Optionally you could try making a kind of phisical alignment system by putting a triangle on the one part and the inverted shape on the other part so it can only dock if its at the correct angle and fits inside the predetermined space.
Under the input controller of a part you can write in the input field: (the name of your command pod/chip).FlightProgram.(name of the variable) and the part will use the vizzy variable as input.
You dont need to get points, there is no practical benifit to having more points, besides the color and style of the box next to your name and if the quality of your crafts suffers because you feel pressured into uploading more, you're taking it too seriously.
I dont know you or what you have done but maybe getting angry at everyone who slightly disagrees with your opinions or actions might not be the best response.
You cant expect to be able to make ssto's like in KSP because of several reasons. We dont have any high altitude high performance optimized jet engines that can turn into a rocket engine, the planets and therefore the velocities required are much larger and we dont have KSP's nuclear engines, which are unbelievably overpowered, because they use a fuel with densities like kerosene, while having the efficiency of liquid hydrogen.
@LofiTurtle i dont think you can just get the heading to the target, but you could subtract the craft position from the target position and then get the angle between that and the north pointing vector. You would have to figure out if the target is to the west or the east though.
Or you could make a full on PID controller, but thats probably a bit overkill for something simple like throttle control, if you want it to steer on its own that might be needed though.
Can you stop spamming the forum page with posts please?
+3 3.7 years ago@KitKart the >10000 is more of a sliver/metallic, rather than black.
+1 3.7 years agoNot really, while good, detailed crafts will stick out, a lot of luck is required to not let it get burried in new.
3.7 years agoI like the idea, though i could see some potential issues with that. The powder toy works with cellular automata as far as i know, so the individual pixels just appear/dissappear depending on certain rules and the pixels around them. This does allow for some pretty impressive looking simulations but is really gpu expensive, even at a 2dimensional and low resolution scale. I couldnt imagine how bad the framerate would be with a 3d implementation. That said, im sure there would be ways to solve this to some degree, i sadly just dont see the devs ever actually picking that idea up.
+1 3.7 years ago@superTT SP is way more matured as a product than SR2, and anyways its not even officially released, its still in early access. And even if SR2 just doesnt become profitable anymore, they might just stop bringing out new updates but the game will never dissappear.
3.7 years agoBut if you buy it you can uninstall/reinstall any time you want. You're not buying the actual files, but the right to download them.
+1 3.7 years agoI'm having a problem when trying to implementing a message dialog. When i tried to call the CreateMessageDialog function when setting the local 'd' variable it throws an error saying it wants a string instead of the 'true'.
Edit: Nevermind, i figured out that you need to specifiy the type instead of just writing true. I guess this was changed from whenever the tutorial was made.
3.7 years agoF10 for hiding the ui. For slow panning shots i suggest decreasing camera speed in the settings for smoother movements.
3.7 years agoI realistically only see rcs as an option there, especially for larger crafts. You will just need to make it stronger.
3.7 years agoUnrelated, but you know that the example engines are all the same rocket engine part, just with different settings to begin with.
3.8 years ago@hendore there actually is a stock droneship on the standart planet, its in the ocean somewhere. Some people have made their own droneships aswell which can be spawned in after setting the proper launch location.
+1 3.8 years agoThe devs are trying to get the two versions to be as similar as possible and besides mods (which just wouldnt be possible) and planet studio, the mobile version has basically all the same features as the pc version.
+2 3.8 years agoMentions dont work in forum posts, they only work in comments.
+2 3.8 years agoIt could be that some parts are clipping inside of each other and are causing a torque, you might wanna disable collision on some parts.
+1 3.8 years ago@JelloAircraftCorporation no, the game uses patched conics, not n-body physics. It would be too confusing for new players and maybe also too performace heavy. I think in ksp theres a mod for it but not for sr2.
+1 3.8 years ago@Silentime in real life you would have a legrange point between earth and moon, that would always be above the same point over the moon as the moon is locked and the legrange point moves with the moon.
+2 3.8 years agoI looked at the planet file and the rotational period seems to be ca. 104 hours. So it seems unreasonable that a luna-stationary orbit would be possible. I might try to fully calculate it later, but you could try to do it youself aswell, the formulas should be easily found with a google search.
+2 3.8 years agoNoone knows any more than you besides the devs themselves. There's gonna be quite a few pretty big features in the next version, so just be patient, asking about it wont make it go faster.
+3 3.8 years ago@Shivansh you'd need to make a mod for that, its not an xml-value.
+1 3.8 years agoI think there is a 'parent ancestry id' vaule in the xml-file of the craft that determines if something will be credited. So before uploading copy the id of the original craft and paste it into your craft file.
+1 3.8 years ago@Politonno no problem
+1 3.8 years ago@CSPACE yeah an SSTO would be way easier in that regard, i guess you have to decide if you'd rather sacrifice a bit of payload capacity or your sanity.
+1 3.8 years ago@CSPACE cool, im was just asking, cause its been quite a struggle getting the all the systems to work, from retrieveing the booster and upper stage, refueling them and then restacking them. What i now need to do is find a way to attach a new payload. I wish you good luck for your own endeavours.
3.8 years agoBut will it be truely reused?
+1 3.8 years agoThats what im working on right now, and i think i almost got it.
You copy the link to the other craft and then write in the description:
3.8 years ago[the thing to display](link)[example](https://www.simplerockets.com/Forums)example
For more information go here.
@Politonno thats what i usually do, linking a non modded version in the description.
+1 3.8 years ago@Politonno well no, sadly. Mods dont work on the mobile version and you need the mods to download the craft, but they are really useful for making realistic crafts.
+1 3.8 years agoYou certainly wanna use these mods.
+1 3.8 years agoThere are quite a few really big features in the works right now, just keep looking on the roadmap to see any progress, asking when it will release wont make it go faster.
3.8 years agoIts Josef Stalin obviously, jokes on you though, im already sad.
+2 3.8 years agoYou could make your own flat area in the planet xml. I belive there's a planet modifier that makes a round flat area at a certain position on the planet like on the stock space center.
3.8 years agoSo you want other peolpe to send you crafts, so that you can upload them. Why?
+2 3.8 years ago@QarabinaKa if you're on pc, you could also get sflanker's improved docking port mod and just use 2 docking ports on each module so it has to dock at a fixed angle.
3.8 years agoOne option would be to put a camera in the docking port and some small blocks as markings and then align it when docking. Optionally you could try making a kind of phisical alignment system by putting a triangle on the one part and the inverted shape on the other part so it can only dock if its at the correct angle and fits inside the predetermined space.
3.8 years agoG̵̢͎̬̠̤̪̳͚͚̙̯̹̟̜̮͖̉͑̍̚Į̸̧̨̛̦͎̥̯̤͖̘͎͚̠̘̌̾̾̓͂V̶̡̤̗̳͇͓̠̰̣̺̝̙͍͚̖͖̘̦͖͔͈͓̱̂̋̔̎̈́͜Ȩ̷̲̣̖̰̱̯̖̤̝̮̮͕̠̟̀̔̈́͌̃̋̑͐̍͗̌͂̌͂̽͘̚͝͝͝Á̷̛̤̟̗̜̲̗͉̥͈̖͔̼̦̞̊̃̍̓̓͂̎̐̃̋̾̎͑͒͘̚͝W̷̛͎̜̳͖̳͙̺̹͎̟͈̜̲̄̒́̕͝Ã̶̡̨̜͕̳̯̭͔̞̝̮͎̤̱͚͙̦̳̗̘̹̗̺͍̒̄̾͌͐̅́̈̽̀͒̈̆̔̐̈̏̈́́͗̓͜͠ͅY̵̛͉̬̩̦̏̈́̂̌̆̈͌̿̀̾̃͛̑̔̇̇̔̿͂͒͑͋̋̓̚͘͝!̸̡̣̗̮̳͇̤̜̪͙͇͙̭̗̫͔͙̜̘͖̯̼̝͐̒̑͆̈́̕
3.8 years agoUnder the input controller of a part you can write in the input field:
+1 3.8 years ago(the name of your command pod/chip).FlightProgram.(name of the variable)and the part will use the vizzy variable as input.@Dracozard i have no clue what causes this, i might experiment a bit to see if i can replicate it.
3.8 years ago@Dracozard that seems like an old bug i had in a relatively early version of the game. I though it was fixed quite a while ago.
3.9 years agoI think its somewhere internally and you won't easily acces it.
+1 3.9 years agoAnything thats outside of the physics render distance will not be visible regardless if you target it or not.
3.9 years agoYou could try to roughly integrate your velocity over time.
+1 3.9 years ago@theUSSR im just saying you shouldnt feel forced to make crafts, its a game we play to have fun after all.
+1 3.9 years agoYou dont need to get points, there is no practical benifit to having more points, besides the color and style of the box next to your name and if the quality of your crafts suffers because you feel pressured into uploading more, you're taking it too seriously.
+2 3.9 years agoYou know that there is a suggestion section of the website. You're not gonna get anything done by posting mountains of forum posts.
+3 3.9 years agoThen do it, but you dont have to anounce everything in a forum post.
+5 3.9 years agoI dont know you or what you have done but maybe getting angry at everyone who slightly disagrees with your opinions or actions might not be the best response.
+4 3.9 years agoYou cant expect to be able to make ssto's like in KSP because of several reasons. We dont have any high altitude high performance optimized jet engines that can turn into a rocket engine, the planets and therefore the velocities required are much larger and we dont have KSP's nuclear engines, which are unbelievably overpowered, because they use a fuel with densities like kerosene, while having the efficiency of liquid hydrogen.
3.9 years ago@LofiTurtle i dont think you can just get the heading to the target, but you could subtract the craft position from the target position and then get the angle between that and the north pointing vector. You would have to figure out if the target is to the west or the east though.
3.9 years agoOr you could make a full on PID controller, but thats probably a bit overkill for something simple like throttle control, if you want it to steer on its own that might be needed though.
3.9 years agoIf you're looking for a completely accurate one, it doesnt exist, but KrAu's RSS is pretty good already.
+1 3.9 years ago