Daniel Prates

Members
  • Content count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Excellent

About Daniel Prates

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer
  1. That is what I just said, I beleive.
  2. Haha! Didnt know that. Well it makes sense.
  3. And is there a reason why there is a delay, with a red light, between firing two stages, like say activating a decoupler for a lower stage and then activating the engine of a uppet stage? Is it just for game immersion? I think is cool, hsving to wait that 1 or 2 seconds, but i see no practical reason for it.
  4. Isnt this because the maneuver marker always points to the path of the maneuver as it was when you planned it, whereas the other markers move inside the actual orbit as it is deformed by the burn? Specially in long burns, there is always gonna be a difference between, for instance, actually burning prograde and burning inside the path of a prograde maneuver pre-stablished. I imagine so, since as the burn goes, the conic path of the maneuver stays the same but the actual orbit will change shape while you burn. In my perception the maneuver node remains static. At least that is the impression had!
  5. Some tweakeables are not that well explained, such as spring strenght, or transmission and dampner ratio in some parts provided by many mods. Its not clear whether moving a spring strenght a given direction is increasing the strenght or decreasing it....
  6. Right-o. This time the new version seems to only affect periferic things. Lets hope it doesnt come with a "game-changer" (pun intended)
  7. Makes me sad when a good mod gets updated, right about a few days before squad is releasing a new ksp version!
  8. Here! https://spacedock.info/mod/1128/Kerbalism TAC profile
  9. Ever since the idea of "loss of signal" was incorporated, a pilot became a mandatory thing in some situations. A good pilot more so. Before that, yeah, eventually the pilot became useless. I am all for expanding the usefullness of all game features at game-end. I think for instace that once you deplete the tech tree, every 1000 science could give 1% "something" like fuel efficiency or so. How to convey that to pilots? I guess we could start considering pilots as "mission commanders". Having higher-ranking commanders would provide bonuses. Since good operation results in better eficiency all-around, yeah, better pilots should imply bonuses!
  10. By "it has its own mod page" I meant it can be found in its own 'space dock' separate niche. I didn't explain correctly, I think.
  11. I think an updated version of this file has just been posted in space dock, like, 24 hours ago or so. Is has its own mod page!
  12. My point exactelly, everything is overkill compared to simply making it bleed EC during use. Its just a single part anyway. The only problem is having such a powerful part, that gulps on nothing!
  13. Right!
  14. Chill ! Not trying to find consensus or, for that matter, giving an oppinion supposed to be definitive or all-encompassing. Just trying to give another view to the matter, shared, I am sure, by many. If anything the perfect way is probably the middle path: always improving, without a version-race. 2016, in my perception, was awfull in that matter. I felt like every 2 or 3 months or so the game was different and all my savegames were lost. Somewhere there must be some equilibrium.
  15. Diacovering mods last year was a game-changer for me (no pun intended. Or perhaps yes). The game enjoyability was multiplied by 100 fold, so today I use a very heavily modded KSP. So everytime a new version comes out, it messes up my build. It takes a lot of time for the mods to catch up, and some never do. This leaves me thinking: is a continuous stream of game versions necessarily a good thing? Can't we just reach a definitive, stable and good enough version of the game and let it sit in, allowing modders to do the rest?