shdwlrd

Members
  • Content Count

    609
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

439 Excellent

2 Followers

About shdwlrd

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's April Fools day, but it would work for a second gas giant in the Kerbol system.
  2. Why is MJ bad? Please give an example? I'm not going to argue about the whole automation versus manual flying thing. There are plenty of arguments throughout the forum on that subject.
  3. Turning the kraken from the scourge of KSP to something than can be helpful. I like the idea. Treat him well, he'll help you. Treat him poorly, here comes his bigger relative to ruin your day.
  4. Thinking back to when I started playing, the biggest thing I was missing (and in some cases, still need) was inflight, on screen guides. An example of what I'm think of would be the navball guidance that MJ uses for gravity turns. Or for some games, use rings or whatever to show the typical flight path you should be using. An easy flight mode for planes. Basically it auto levels the wings after turning or banking. When turning, the plane automatically banks, and adjusts to hold (as best as possible) the pitch you have. Basically, make the in flight stuff easy for beginners. The rest, the typical tutorials work. Just make easy to find for the situation the what's info for. Like building in the VAB, have a permanent button that say something like "for more info".
  5. After reviewing how to use Kos, I actually got to test it. It works pretty good, but there are some oddities. I'll need to run the scenarios over again to see if it will preform the same. But I do have a couple suggestions. Add in holding patterns near the KSC and desert runway. That way you can guide planes into the pattern from anywhere and then do the landing approaches from there. Also, if there is missed landing, the ap can directly fly you back to the pattern to try again. Add a check see if the SAS is on and turn it off. If the SAS is on, the ap won't take control of the plane.
  6. Thank for that little tidbit, I didn't know you could do that.
  7. I wasn't trying to compare a Kos script to a .DLL plugin. I was just curious if the could tune the PID's and max limits to different crafts. The planes I make are stable, but some are underpowered. They can't do high amounts of positive pitch for very long before stalling. I was planning to using it to send planes to a set of coordinates and have it land near by. That is kind of moot at the moment, I'm getting errors left and right with Kos. I haven't had time to scour the Kos threads for the wiki to see if it's a bad install or just user error.
  8. That was what I was looking for, thanks for the clarification.
  9. That was kind of what I was thinking for the MPL. But I would be agreeable for that type of usage for the MPL. You have to be aware of the power usage and such if you create something other that a basic craft, so that is no big deal. But the real killer is the amount of power that is required to send/relay data is ridiculous. Add to problem with transmitting science is that you can't continue where you left off it must be sent 100% at that moment to get credit for it. If were talking about the technology from the '40's and '50's I can understand it. But from the '60's on, there were ways to control the data flow and restart data transmission with little to no data overlap or loss. So the little underpowered probe, should be able to send your data in several chunks and get credit for it. I don't know if kerbalism handles data that way, but that mechanism should be stock. Yes, samples need to be returned to Kerbin or a colony for further processing and to get credit for it. Well, yes and no. You're right, science shouldn't be the sole method to unlock new tech. New tech should be unlocked by the amount of funds you can throw into the R&D and time, with science to open it up, or helping it out. Filling in missing info, for anything outside of the Kerbol system, that should be true. (Again, the Kerbol system should be well known when KSP2 is released.)
  10. Science and career modes go together even though they can be played separately. But that's not the point of the thread. I agree, the science mechanic needs to be reworked and expanded upon. But how do you make it so it's not so much of a chore. Certain things need multiple observations to get a good picture of what's happening. Certain things just need time to complete. Experiments that requires player interaction needs to produce science even when the player doesn't interact with it. Science that requires multiple observations should slowly fill in the missing information and slowly give you science. The science that just takes time to complete, there's not much you can do but wait. The science that requires player interaction should sporadic produce science when the player isn't around. The MPL should be nerfed, and just used to run, and pre-process the experiments. (I'm assuming that it would be included in KSP2.) It shouldn't be used as a true lab. That needs to be done on Kerbin or a colony if in a different star system. Yes, it can produce science on its own, but very little.
  11. Please in laymans terms, can you explain what you're trying to demonstrate between the different encoding functions, and the different results. (Non programmer here, I know you're timing compiling runs, but I don't know what you're trying to show with the results.)
  12. No, I haven't tried any modded careers. It left that bad of an impression that I'm not willing to try it again, modded or not. I know that there are mods for KSP1 that change around the tech tree. But none of them are setup close enough to how I would like to see them. Since there's sandbox, I haven't deemed it worth my time to learn how to rearrange it. Honestly, if KSP didn't have a sandbox mode, I would have left it behind a long time ago. That's how bad I think Squad botched both the career and science modes. I sincerely hope that PD does something that represents a good, common sense progression through the technologies being presented in the game.
  13. The point I failed to get across is that science should be used as either a catalyst for something to be researched, help speed up or complete research, or to fill in info gaps for unexplored planets. (I'm not including the Kerbol system, I'm making the assumption that it has been well explored at the beginning of KSP2.) Yes, I agree with you. Science needs a purpose outside of just unlocking the tech tree. If the R&D lab needs different materials tested in orbit to move along the current research. Ooo, something to do. You have to leave in orbit for a few month, so be it. You can do other things while waiting, or just speed up time. Yes, it could fall into that routine trap, but if you keep the routine experiments local to the SOI of the colonies, they could be setup or completely relatively quickly. Just to be fair, I don't play science or career modes. I hate how the tech tree is laid out. If the tech tree was laid out more sanely, I would actually try it.
  14. Spore was fun while it lasted. But yeah, KSP isn't about discovering new life and conquering them.