Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mattinoz

  1. Having had a mis-spent youth with a good hand me down lego collection the whole Procedural parts aren't lego like still confuses me. I mean if I make a shape like a tank profile I can repeat that profile in one block high increments until I run out of blocks and It become one things as far as I'm concerns although it still could fall apart. Well just adapt to the changing situations on the fly. ie Bring it on as far as procedural goes for me . Tanks, booster, solar panels, wings the works. Have an off thread structural test in the part that might deform the tank in a future (milliseconds later) physics frame so the slow down happens as things go pear-shaped and you can watch the full glory of the explosion.
  2. Would assume most major theme updates and DLC will each have a new system to well offer challengers specific to the each new game mechanic.
  3. I am excited for the Mac edition
  4. Steve Jobs showed the the first Halo demo seen in public at Macworld New York last century.
  5. Who does that leave given the Mac/Linux 15% were dumped 6months ago?
  6. I assume the Mun lander is caller R2-Detour?
  7. Sure as long as we at the same time don't underestimate the time skill and vision of KSPs community content creators and their willingness to share tip tricks learnings with each other and interested newcomers. The free publicity alone from foresting the community would sure cover maintenance and improvements of a tool that is used in house anyway.
  8. Unless what you are trying to do is put the Kerbal back into orbit without a vehicle.
  9. In terms of game play it would take many months even years in game time for something happening at duna to travel back to Kerbin. Then even with in the system thing happen far apart that getting them together to interact is a skill in it's own right. How dense a game play situation are you expecting for this to be a real problem? Oh well can always be a mod - might even be one before offical multi player once we get a look at the game save file structure.
  10. Don’t most of the current mars mission plan involve sending ‘rescue’ missions prior to the crewed mission? supplies and tools not found in the original ship. Whole complete extra ships to come back to earth on. the difference here is Ksp is a game it can be fun to find your crew in unintended consequences then be able to work backwards to avoid or add an escape route. Sure Kerbals have the luxury of time that humans don’t so you can just launch a rescue seconds after the accident fully customised a decade later the survivors are just sitting waiting. Still it would be more fun to work on incremental success instead of progressively failing.
  11. Why not have different branches and just use one of the commonly available versioning systems to run it? It looks like GIT anyway so why not use those tools. Solves the transport issues of remote low interaction multiple players by using a well known system and game can then concentrate on close and live multi-player interactions in game. Ok so you need an editor that stops the merging with the main timeline to cause a paradox but in theory that could be as simple as blocking merges that paradox the timeline. Add say a system to that allows a contract to be issued in the past that solves the paradox if completed. or the player gets reverted to last stable position in their branch. I call it ground hog day mode. Crash and brake something "its Groundhog Day again" and you find yourself back before last burn or change in sphere of influence. Yes I'm a big fan of this idea. Let me plan by the seat of my pants. In the same way KSP wanted us to fly by the seat of our pants, crash, rinse, repeat, learn, laugh. Edit to add: Would love full "momento" mode ie have scenarios with say a capsule in reentry to KSP splashdown with 3 kerbals and bunch of science data on board from Mun or Duna or such and have to work backwards to put the mission together. Make great forum content as people post speed or efficiency runs.
  12. The terrain system has from what we have been told been rewritten, restructured and rebuilt. So frankly we don't know what is capable of or could be capable of given the stated gaol of the new game was to set up for another 10 years of continual game play and Sales revenue (facts of life). Sure what is being shown is a first step to take it from minimal product to system that could eat each of the bodies in the system to make a Dyson sphere would still be a massive under taking. overload this with multiplayer and it is certainly interesting. If they even want to take it that far is also a big unknown but it would allow a decade of interesting scope maybe even 3. So understand if they are thinking that sort of overhaul is KSP3 in 2040. I think it could be multiple DLC's not just one along this path. with say procedural (but still on rails) Planet generation in between before simple deformation of surfaces and caves and Kerbal made cravens for colonies.
  13. Didn't the orginal Mk1 cockpit look like this before it was replaced with the GA style Mk1 Cockpit? Agree they should have added the new one to the game instead of replacing.
  14. Seems to be some structures hidden by the rocket burn at far end of runway.
  15. The original dev team said a few times in years they wanted something like this in game. it would certainly be advantageous
  16. Similar to a sand storage battery on earth. I'd assume with radiators out the the inky blackness of space and ground coupling to large thermal mass. there would be someway to have a heat engine making power all night at least.
  17. Why boring? Those missions in real lift have been pretty inspiring voyages of discovery. If anything it would be great if progression made trips like that more valuable gameplay wise. More mapping a discovery parts in the early stages, tighter launch loads or less progression points on Kerbin so gravity slingshots to do flybys has good gameplay targeting. Those sorts of missions could be fun challenges with high rewards both in terms of skills and opening up the game world.
  18. I would have thought iOS and MacOS would be targets before switch. yes, yes, who wants to play KSP on tiny screen with limited controls .... oddly on one has said that about switch.
  19. Mods or DLC or both or a JV between Mod makers and the team like content creator packs (which lets the mods run console). Many options to push the game in a certain direction test the market potential to amp up the challenge factor. If the game runs 10+ years making money to justify it the better for everyone.
  20. Add parts for linking that are a bit flexible. Can cope with either compression or tension (ie. struts) or shear to tie parts of the tree together and allow resources to flow but force transfer is limited to only the plane they are designed for. Limits the compute as it can take out feedback loops. Might help with giant stations and colonies as there would be only very limited situations sub-sections of the massive craft would impact each other otherwise they are just floating along together. We know craft building is changing even the sub-assembly system that has been shown already allows for multi root craft where the roots are always distinct. A more flexibly approach to how sub-assemblies can come together might be possible.
  21. While it good to discuss until there has been a bit of play through it's hard to know if potential problems will be real barriers. Still, Once you have flown a route the orbital mechanics of that route are known minimum spec's or a spec window for the route would be known. 2 factors seem critical thrust to weight and dV. I'd think they could if it proves to be an issue allow ship upgrades for a route. I'd think over time many would establish new infrastructure in the game that would make old routes redundant before they need distinct upgrades. ie an orbital parts workshop pulling some material from the surface of the body it orbits and some from the body your initial supply route was coming from.
  22. One simple solution each solar system runs like clockwork. Each supply run only happens when conditions are identical. for more complex the route the longer it will be for route to turn up again. As bigger engines come online the more routes open up that can occur more regularly. also as colony come online the need for the complex routes drops out of usefulness. the only problem with 2 can be solved with a UI that asks if you want to repeat it every x days. with options to spawn new ship if one hasn't returned to load up new cargo.
  23. Agree having graphic program to design flag would be overkill but what would be great is to have tools in game to use flag well like:- A) have a default flag of our own. either upload own or pick a stock one B) use the new paint system to pick up colours from our flag System picks a 3 colour scheme based on flag. Stretch goals C) have paint system use flag design as super graphics for part allowing us scale the flag to any size to wrap a face or the whole part. Like wings and tails. Thinking like this D) Allow as to have multiple "companies/divisions" to have own default flag and autocolor saved ships spawned for that company in company colours Say if you have a set design for an air race in multi-player each player would get the colour scheme based on their flag.
  • Create New...