Jump to content

realistic mods


were71

Recommended Posts

Good thread, now I don't hafta start my own \o/

I'm lookin to start a new career with realism mods for greater career immersion.

I'm thinkin:

FAR

Deadly Re-entry

Ioncross (or TAC -- which is 'better' or more highly recommended, and least buggy, most 'polished')

possibly RemoteTech -- not sure how it works with the new comms tho. thoughts?

what others?

not so interested in the re-scale, modular fuel, or ISP scaling. perhaps the latter, maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My list for realistic mods are short and simple.

-FAR

-Deadly Re-entry

-TAC Life support/Ioncross Life support

-Remote Tech

-KIDS (its a difficulty scaler for KSP by Farrem)

-Multi-fuels which makes it so you need real life fuel loads LO2, Hydrogen and the like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My list for realistic mods are short and simple.

-FAR

-Deadly Re-entry

-TAC Life support/Ioncross Life support

-Remote Tech

-KIDS (its a difficulty scaler for KSP by Farrem)

-Multi-fuels which makes it so you need real life fuel loads LO2, Hydrogen and the like.

I tend to prefer TAC since it can track remote consumption of life support. So when your kerbals are in a passive vessel, they don't suddenly have infinite LS.

You should check out earth-sized kerbin too! Now with Mun & Minmus. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a simulator with little green men from outer space. I think you're losing the race with realism right there.

Exactly how was this comment helpful or even necessary, We get it, you don't wanna play realistic, what's the need to crap on everyone who does?

My list for realism

RemoteTech

Deadly Reentry

and TAC Lifesupport

I'd say FAR was well but I don't build many planes so it's not needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so TAC over ION for life-support? is that a general consensus? how 'bout stability and bug-levels? ... TAC seems a little overly-complex to me, but I'm open to being swayed =]

I haven't used either so I have no input on either of them. I like the idea of both but both would require me starting ANOTHER game, and I just don't feel like it right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so TAC over ION for life-support? is that a general consensus? how 'bout stability and bug-levels? ... TAC seems a little overly-complex to me, but I'm open to being swayed =]

I personally use Ioncross Life Support, but I've heard that TAC is harder than Ioncross.

Basically, Ioncross's oxygen recyclers convert 50% (or 67% for the larger recycler) of the carbon dioxide back into oxygen and the rest is just discarded. In real life, the conversion rate would be much less than that. Meanwhile, TAC doesn't even have any recyclers. However (as far as I know), in real life oxygen tanks would not be nearly as heavy as in Ioncross or TAC. Therefore I think that Ioncross is perhaps more "realistic."

Of course, it's hard to get "realistic" in Kerbal Space Program, since many things in real life are different than in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to prefer TAC since it can track remote consumption of life support. So when your kerbals are in a passive vessel, they don't suddenly have infinite LS.

You should check out earth-sized kerbin too! Now with Mun & Minmus. :D

Ioncross now supports resource usage for passive vessels. I prefer it because it only deals with electricity, oxygen and co2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...