Coga19000

Members
  • Content Count

    355
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

57 Excellent

1 Follower

About Coga19000

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I would think the nest way to get tour desired result would be to allow gendering and angle-locking to docking ports from the get-go (it is already stock, but you have to activate it from the config) Instead of battling the many issues of rotating structures in space, simply make sure they are aligned before they dock.
  2. I don't wish to participate in the argument of more realistic tech trees, but I'll make a correction; early probes did NOT have solar panels. Besides, it makes more sense that early flights will have to be restricted by something (here the battery)
  3. MechJeb actually lets you do that, if you wish; it calculates the trajectory, gives you control, and points a target programme marker where you need to go. As for implementation in stock, sure, I'm all for it. Maybe also have the trajectory get more efficient as you progress down the tech tree?
  4. Because the developer of the Atlas decided that if it works in KSP, it should work in real life. Obviously.
  5. How come? The Kerbal X has no flaws I can personally identify either.
  6. Jool 5 and Eve Rocks, eat your heart out. Oh, if only I had a fraction of the skill needed to pull this off, maybe I would try it... guess I'll just stay here and watch the winners.
  7. I doubt that it will be able to be as good and complicated as the original and yet work for more than 5 minutes before our phones explode with the collective power of a thousand suns. I mean, I could heat my home during the whole of winter just by playing the PC version with mods. Besides that, it is an intriguing idea. Intruiging enough that, even though I'm convinced it will definetely not work as is, I am tempted to brainstorm some ideas in my head on how it could work. I will submit my results as soon as I think of something that works satisfactorily.
  8. No. It has nothing to do with the game as it was first concieved as and loved as, will either require a excrementston of work for something that does not benefit us in any way other than aesthetic or so easy it shatters all suspension of disbelief and makes KSP into yet another space opera game, and it would simply be another time-consuming charade that would lead to yet more abuse of the timewarp button. Besides, I am almost definite it is currently clsoe to impossible to implement in the game. Even editing modifies the planet as a single event, while the game is not closed; when the game opens, all planets are on rails, and impossible to influence in any way. Making those planets able to dynamically change (besides a wait-5-months-and-pop!-instant-planet mechanic that would be just stupid) would require a major rewritting of very fundamental parts of the code that have barely changed since version 0.18 or earlier, and open a whole new can of Kraken worms for everybody to enjoy. It would in essence require SQUAD to make a new game to support this feature -and it's simply not a good enough idea to make a whole new game to accomodate it.
  9. I simply love this idea. It would probably be easy to add, not interfere with anything, and since it is concerned less with other stars and more with the boundaries of our OWN Kerbal System, maybe SQUAD will be a tad more willing to add it! All of my likes.
  10. What kind of purpose would that serve? Fairings are not required to reenter an atmosphere (unles you simply want them to look cool in their aeroshell), and launching a 0.625m launcher to launch a 0.625m payload that can do almost nothing seems like a fruitless endeavor to me except for maybe bragging rights.
  11. Retractable radiators should be what you need. Heat sinks will not help you here; they are basically batteries for your heat working on reverse (absorb heat when in use, stop working when full) and since there is not a night side to Kerbol (duh), they will simply extend your stay by a fixed amount. If you see that radiators simply aren't enough, you can put a stack of heat shields on the front of the ship, connected by decouplers, and point them at Kerbol. They ALSO just extend your stay by a fixed amount, but they can really make a difference if in numbers, and combined with TONS radiators.
  12. coredumpster has hit the nail on the head on this one. I should advise you, though, that the Klaw is one or the more consistently buggy parts, and a prime target for Kraken attacks. In this particular case, you should only use it after you ensure that you don't have the Delta-V margin to return it to LKO- but if you even considered the act of a Kerbal jury-rigging a parachute onto it, I guess you are confident you do have such a margin. Alternatively, if you are not opposed to mods, KAS is an incredibly well-received and well-made mod that allows you to do exactly that: attach or remove parts from spaceships with Kerbals. In this particular case, stock Kerbal already allows you to transfer science, so you don't need it now, but you will find it to be a really useful mod in many parts of a game, especially anything involving extraplanetary construction. It also provides tools to facilitate moving parts around, connecting them structurally, and transferring fuel and resources without docking. If your PC can handle it, there's no reason not to have it.
  13. I haven't played KSP for quite a while now, but I do remember that back when I played, you had to keep the ship in question loaded all the time for it to correctly keep mining - or doing anything, for that matter. I also vaguely remember a mod that mitigated that.
  14. If I only had to choose one, and if the game-breaking bugs get fixed anyways, I vouch for depth. Most people want the bugs fixed, but I say only the ones that desperately need fixing; the rest are deeply ingrained into the KSP culture by now, and they are mostly more of a hilarity than a hindrance.