MR L A

Members
  • Content count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About MR L A

  • Rank
    Space Poet

Recent Profile Visitors

339 profile views
  1. Just clip it downwards... it fits beautifully then
  2. Wut?
  3. I've had Elon, which was cool. But also Lana.. LANA.. LANAAAAAAAAAAA
  4. Splitting it up is a VERY good idea. I was just talking about adding the whole thing in one dollop.. that's what would be overwhelming imo
  5. It can be ignored and should. I'm telling you to ignore what the dev notes said and look at it logically. One part has a progression that allows it to transfer fuel bidirectionally. Another part becomes available that forces one way fuel transfer. They aren't really related to each other in any meaningful way beyond that.
  6. I get this sometimes too, often with my shuttles. Either the front or rear RCS will just completely stop for no apparent reason.. its like the game somehow loses the connection between the port and the fuel.
  7. Respectfully disagree. It's just one part that gets a part upgrade with the fuel node. Before the upgrade it can only attach and then jettison things. After the upgrade, fuel can be transferred through it too. That seems like a pretty logical and linear progression to me. I'd ignore any reasoning tied to the fuel line, it only confuses things unnecessarily and both parts/functions remain separate and relevant anyway. For example, once the fuel node has been unlocked, the decoupler allows fuel to be shared (or not) between tanks and subsequently jettisoned when empty. The fuel line allows the flow of fuel in one direction rather than both. perhaps it would be useful to think of the decoupler as a bi-directional fuel line?
  8. I think a lot of us forget how much of a new experience was when we first played KSP. Understanding how prograde, retrograde, radial and ascending/descending nodes work, how to do transfers, how to dock, flight stability, heck even how to get into orbit is a HUGE learning curve for a completely new player. Adding mods like MechJeb, InfernalRobotics and even KER would be an extremely confusing and un-enjoyable experience for new players. As experienced players, we forget that we have pretty much mastered the stock abilities of KSP and seek to add more complexity as we progress. Having said that, I will reiterate how essential KAC is - though I do think even this may appear a little confusing to a brand new player. I think SQUAD should have a play of Stellaris with the tutorial guide thing switched on. Possibly the best way to introduce a player to any game I've ever seen
  9. Download mods called Scatterer, EVE and RealPlume They're available on SpaceDock or Curse
  10. Ha, some good ones on here guys lets keep 'em coming!
  11. I second, third and fourth the Mk2 nosecone there's a mod with a pretty sexy one in but I didn't like the rest of the parts, with the exception of the Linear Aerospike, which was just plain sexy! Though iirc the textures weren't quite perfect Other than that, the only parts I actually want to see are the Porkjet overhaul things that didn't quite make it to the game... I've been using the mod, and it is absolutely gorgeous (SQUAD, if you read this, I will pay a large amount for it to be included in a future DLC, that's how much I loved his work on RPO). Shame the 2.5 meter stuff is so ugly, especially that decoupler...
  12. (Hopefully this is the right section) Hi everyone! Last night I was scrolling through Instagram (yes, I'm one of those) and I found an interesting post. It was captioned "The last two games you played have merged into one... How bad did it turn out?" The OP had GTA V and Mario Kart As this is the KSP forums, lets keep it to Kerbal Space Program and X. So, what game did you last play other than KSP? Do they mix well? Mine was the original Star Wars Battlefront II... So, I guess Kerbal Klones using blasters?
  13. No. Of course scientists didn't go to the moon to build the F1, but they did, however, do a hell of a lot of other science things before the built the F1. You just have your example backwards. A proper refutation of your nonsensical argument is that scientists DID go sub-orbital (the German V-2), then orbital (Sputnik, Juno, Atlas) before they built moon capable rockets (Saturn). The reason for your confusion is the apparent lack of an even bigger and better engine/rocket as a result of going to the moon.
  14. weird.. I did this literally an hour ago haha fortunately my insertion stage sill had 700 dV left and my lander had over 1000... so as soon as I realised what had happened, I burned a combination of retrograde and radial out (my orbit was taking be closer to the sun) - allowing Kerbin to catch-up with my craft. It was not an efficient way to manoeuvre, but I wanted Jeb back asap, managing so in approx 20 days (more efficient manoeuvre's would have be waiting the best part of a year). Yes this was in career, also, I play with reverts turned off, so I HAD to get Jeb back!
  15. I imagine the reason behind this is similar to why KER can't detect acceleration coming from RCS thrusters or acceleration due to gravity - only works with currently attached engines