• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

1 Follower

About rextable

  • Rank
    Terror Pigeon

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Correct me if I'm wrong; but surely a star (blue, red, brown, unicorn barf coloured or otherwise) wouldn't have a dark centre with a glowy ring around its circumference?
  2. Yo I have a general question: Mods like Smoke Screen, Real Plume, Real Plume Stock etc all help make exhaust plumes look amazing - I think we can all agree on that. Now, has anyone here ever thought that said plumes look even more amazing during time acceleration? This phenomenon is - I assume - because to the animations are running much more quickly (???) thereby making it look as though the rocket really is being propelled forward by them. If this is indeed the case, why do all plume animations - stock or otherwise - appear to go rather slowly thereby giving the appearance of gentle trickle rather than ferocious expansion? Is there no way to link the animation playback speed with vehicle velocity or even make the animations just play faster? Please enlighten me. Herp derp x :::::::EDIT:::::::: Okay, I've been a lemon and realised I was in fact talking about video footage sped up that makes engine plumes look more betterer - NOT just time accelerating in game. Either way, my question still stands: WHY in the name of ass can't plumes be made to look like they're actually propelling a vehicle forward/upward/whatever rather than just trickling out the engine bell? WHIIIEEEE!!!!!????? I'm loosing sleep over this x
  3. Is there? I've never used that mod - I'll be sure to go and check it out. In the meantime, I wait with interest on what Mr Neatea creates next. Carry on
  4. Oooh!!!! Very interdasting. Should you feel so inclined, It'd be amazeballz to finally get some decent landing legs? The ones in the old AIES mod remain the best looking and most versatile for KSP hands down but that mod died many moons ago. Ha, see what I did there... ha.... ha... I'll go now.
  5. Agreed. Though I am intrigued at how moddable KSP2 will be and what that'll mean for the modding community. Who knows what might be possible if an enthusiastic modder put in the time and effort. I've never created a mod before but planetary detail is defo something I'd love to pursue. We'll have to wait and see
  6. Bringing things back down to Earth for a moment (ha, see what I did there?)... I'm really hoping that each planet will have more distinctive regions and unique geological features. Extinct volcanos like Olympus Mons on Mars or Jupiter's great storm for example. I know these ideas are a little more pedestrian than doughnut shaped planets and alike but think of the views as you fly over them while doing SCIENZE. I believe the devs have already hinted at their plans to make surfaces more interesting and varied from region to region so I'm happy. On the subject of gas giants. I assume everyone has seen the latest and greatest pics from the Juno space craft? They're so mind blowingly intricate. Just imaging flying over that and peering down into the cloud layers as you pass by. Might give one more reason to get up close and personal with Jool - the great featureless green blob of nothingness that it currently is. There are sooooo many ways the devs could make the existing planets more interesting and detailed that wouldn't be asking the Earth (haha, I did it again) in terms of developer time and players' computers. Craters, lake beds, boulder fields, canyons, volcanoes, geezers, sand dunes, cliffs, cloud layers, mountains, spam etc. The list of real life planetary surface features is endless. just google surface of Mars or Pluto for inspiration. At the very least I hope the devs make planets more moddable in KSP2 so we can add surface features and detail to our hearts content X
  7. I respectfully disagree in part with the OP. Purely in the interests of the discussion... For me personally, KSP has always been about spacecraft building - Lego style. I came to KSP just the science-points-to-unlock-more-lego-bitz mechanic was added. I'm aware that there are many people who berate this mechanic but, as far as I've always been concerned, it's a beautifully simple and fun system that was more than enough to motivate me to push my creativity further to reach more distant bodies. Yes - it's gamy and 'unrealistic' but, as I have said many times before, KSP is a game not a simulator. For those who want more realism, there are a plethora of amazing mods that cater for this desire wonderfully. I have no doubt the same will be the case for KSP2, if not more so. Again, this is just my personal opinion and I'm expressing it purely for discussion's sake so please don't bash me: I've never enjoyed the additional economic, contract and reputation mechanics as I found them to get in the way of what I wanted to do - fly fantasmic contraptions to space and do KSCIENZE!!! Thus, I have stuck to playing in science mode. Of course there are many people who only play in sandbox mode, and others still who love the contracts system and want more development in those areas. Fair enough I say. However, I do wholeheartedly agree with the OP that the science mechanic could and should be a far richer experience in any event. However, I'm not keen on the idea of a predetermined story/campaign mode. Thus, If I was to ask for one thing in KSP2 it wouldn't be a story campaign or economic mechanics of any sort. Instead, I'd hope for science and discovery to be the sole currency of the game. Said currency would do one thing and one thing only: facilitate a players exploration of the glorious mystery-gooey Kerbally kuniverse in the way they see fit. My reasoning for the preference is a personal one: As far as I'm concerned, real life space exploration is principally about science and discovery. Money and politics are a tedious constraint on said concern and only stifle ones creativity as a Kerbal-space-thingy designer IMHO. For me, the science mechanic (whatever form that may take in the new game) is where the fun sweet spot is and I hope that sentiment will be allowed for with KSP2. In short, I'd very much prefer to write my own Kerbal story thank you very much. Carry on X
  8. Does anyone have any idea what time today peeps in the UK can expect Breaking Ground to drop? I'm getting board of constantly refreshing my Steam store page
  9. I'm somewhere between klesh and you As RatchetinSpace says, "reposting ideas gives a current-affair look into how the community feels about a particular suggestion" and that's a fair point imho. Where I do agree with you is with thoughtless or way-beyond-the-scope-of-KSP suggestions. Galaxies, multiplayer, aliens and yes - black holes - are good examples. This is a bit tedious because they're just never gonna happen. However, as klesh says, no one is forcing me to read these threads. Personally, I really enjoy reading posts where someone has taken the time to express their thoughts on how x or y suggestion could be implemented (I did this recently over on the New KSC Building suggestions thread). Some of these are comical WTAF pie- in-the-sky nonsense - which is fun to read. There are also some very measured, well thought out and ingenious ideas out there too. So, please keep those coming people.
  10. Defo a test facility or gamey-fun-to-play-with-and-actually-useful representation thereof. ...Like a vacuum chamber building thingy??? NASA actually has one these in real life. I don't know about other people, but I very much enjoy building complex missions that actually work the way I intended them too (as opposed to going comically/disastrously wrong). At present, I test each stage of a mission profile by cheating the relevant sub-assembly to the location in the solar system it's intended to operate and then see how it behaves, go back to the VAB, tweak, rinse and repeat. The yawn factor of doing this in any other way just isn't fun in my opinion. Now, aside from having to use the cheat menu (which obviously compromises one's suspension of disbelief), it gets very tedious waiting for the game to load the entire solar system and all my preexisting mission detritus every time I leave the VAB. Furthermore, the satisfaction and sense of wonder when finally completing said mission is pretty much lost because I've effectively already done the mission many times over, all be it in a piecemeal fashion. Thus, I propose a vacuum chamber - KSP style. It would serve as a sandbox for testing the game-world physics on our creations. In edition to the launch button in the VAB, a 'test' button could load us into another building where the KSP laws of physics are active but nothing else. In this building (the interior of a huumungus pressure vessel with biiiiiiig flood lights), one could set the physical conditions (much like Kerbal Engineer does in the VAB) ie gravity, atmosphere density and composition. We could also set some comical but functional Kerbal style replica terrain, it's slope angle and resource composition - for testing lander stability and mining operations for example. Imagine little Kerbal scientists peering over from behind a replica Duna sand dune making notes on their clipboards while they observe your rover pootling about on some pretend Duna sand etc etc. I realise, being able to control gravity isn't possible in real life but lets not forget that we're playing a game. In KSP, any such test facility would be a magical vacuum chamber, wind tunnel, neutral buoyancy pool and computer modelling system all rolled into one. IMHO, the value of such a building to quality of life during gameplay, not to mention immersion (only without the tedium of hyper realism), is very large indeed. Apologies for the essay :-D
  11. Yup - new landing legs please. Also, folding, stow-able rover wheels. It surprises me that (IMHO) to date no one has ever surpassed the AIES landing legs. When combined with Tweakscale they were an amazingly versatile set and I used them on everything. I vaguely remember reading that folding legs - like the ones we see on real life landers - are very tricky to model. Is this true (question for anyone knowledgeable who cares to answer)? If so, this would explain the lack of any cool leg mods.
  12. Aha!!! Just tried it. You're spot on - Thank you! Now then.... onward and upwards with my refuelling base