• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1854 Excellent

About ZooNamedGames

Contact Methods

  • Website URL ZooNamed@gmail.com
  • Skype ZooNamed
  • Twitter Save the Rocket Builders!!!

Profile Information

  • Location Leaning on the Flight Director's Console
  • Interests Space. Space History. Retro Gaming. Getting into space.

Recent Profile Visitors

5932 profile views
  1. Slip in undetected @MK3424!
  2. It's been discussed but seemed more work than it's worth. Plus it would be debated as good or bad.
  3. Hence option 2 I provided at the end.
  4. It's a Charmander .
  5. As we can see in the Dev notes, there is more development coming to the runway. Which although is good news, it still leaves one aspect that every player knows of. The decision to just turn around and take off from the flat peninsula around the KSC, or risk the bumpy level 1 runway. To counter that, I have a new idea. My idea being; there should be two types of wheels added. Runway wheels and All Terrain wheels. Runway wheels would be capable of going faster speeds and would be capable of driving itself (internal motor). If these wheels are used off of solid runways (KSC runway, taxiways, hidden KSC structures, etc) they skip, jerk your craft suddenly or explode from the rough terrain. These Runway Wheels would be the ones you first unlock in career mode. They would be cheaper as well. Alternatively, the All Terrain wheels are capable of greater braking power, and also greater impact speeds, as well as obviously behaving normally on non-runway areas. Despite being more expensive, All Terrain wheels would also have under carriage lights (landing gear lights). The whole idea of this comes to me from the SNES game 'Pilotwings'. In the game, failing to land the Biplane on the runway (or any concrete structure) causes the landing gear to break (regardless of approach/landing angle or speed). Now I don't want KSP to be as harsh, however the game brings an interesting idea of how landing gear could work. Pilotwings teaches the importance of mastering your approach angle and other flight basics which KSP could also take from. Again it doesn't need to be as harsh for those who after a 5 hour mission barely misses the runway, however it should punish those who would rather just turn off the level 1 runway just to avoid the bumps and hills. In real life, passenger airliner wheels are different from the wheels of aircraft that can land on undeveloped grassy runways or hills. Airliner wheels are designed to optimize breaking power and are not built to withstand small debris or bumps and other natural topography. Whereas planes which land in the undeveloped parts of the world are. So it would seem reasonable to consider that. If players would rather, perhaps wheels could simply be interchangeable from the VAB/SPH right click menu (with respective cost increases). It would be simpler to add, but I think that having two different types of wheels would make it harder on players to not just change the wheel type out and then turn off the runway. But that's just me. That said, let me know of your thoughts. Ps, thoughts on the new profile picture?
  6. I'm starting to write something new (don't want to give too much away) and would like to keep it as medically correct as possible, especially since it'll be based within a hospital. I could google some of this but I'd rather have someone who knows the specifics better and can possibly better drive both the diseases, injuries, conditions as well as the medicines and treatments used. As far as what I mean by 'medicine' (I am aware that is a generic and very broad term considering the field of possibilities it could imply) is someone who knows problems hospital patients have (the common cases, the rare cases), the treatment(s), and such. If you know someone then please let me know in a PM, or if you don't understand and have questions let me know. I apologize if this is a bit vague. It's one of those cases where I know what I want but I don't quite know what the proper form of the question.
  7. @sal_vager, I got KSP on May 1st of 2013 . Where does that leave me?
  8. Yes. Please heed this. We don't want this thread locked.
  9. I think I may see the problem- Squad created the Steam page and has since let the creating members leave. (Ahem possibly @KasperVld) or any other highly ranked Squad member. Admins selected may also have been Squad developers. They likely created the forum back in 2013 when the game first hit Steam and intended 1:1 moderation activity however as this forum grew the Steam forum got neglected. To explain @Vanamonde what OP is meaning; is that someone (not Steam), has the ability to manipulate the Steam forum structure. Now Vanamonde and other moderators may not have their role stretch outside of these forums and onto the Steam forums. I've run groups and whatnot frequently (before discovering Discord... which Squad should make an official KSP discord). From that experience, I know this is Squad's power, they just likely forgot about who they gave these powers. Granted Squad likely can contact Valve and ask who the Admin likely is. From there, Squad can possibly reallocate who's Admin.
  10. That'd I'd be greatly appreciative of.
  11. I intend to test it. He may be the hero of this thread.
  12. Yet I can build something far bigger in 1.1.3. Something per say, the size of a Antanov-225 that would operate perfectly fine as far as not exploding on the runway. Suddenly 1.2 changes it so they're effective as a paperweight.
  13. It's what I modeled it after. I make shortcuts and alternatives to make it and work I'd like to point out to you, your example still uses fixed gear. The purpose of the Chase is to provide a Cessna like vehicle that's capable of carrying crew or cargo as well as being reliable, and realistic to normal flight mechanics.
  14. I've got a model already in place. I don't want to add things that arnt realistic because of one part's faults. Im trying to get it as realistic as possible within the frame of stock KSP and having to bend over backwards because of one faulty part and the lack of a replacement or a fix (after many complaints and demands).
  15. I'd accept it being wooden or whatnot but considering that it's the only source for fixed gear as a sandboxer, that becomes moot. Either give alternatives or fix the problem.