pandaman
-
Posts
2,853 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by pandaman
-
-
Rendezvous and docking are never 'easy', but they do get easier with practice.
It takes patience setting up your rendezvous, don't be afraid to use multiple orbits to get your closest approach closer each orbit, trying to get it spot on in the first orbit often makes it a lot harder and rusks screwing it up completely.
I never used mechjeb, but try it if you think it will help, Scott Manley's video helped me a lot.
-
I guess you are suggesting 'pop up' windows that give the ship info text and list the action groups for that vessel.
Yes, I think that would be a very useful feature.
-
1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:
Imho AN/DN are just fine as is, and is easier to understand than what looks like a pair of omegas
I tend to agree with this ^
Nothing wrong with using the symbols and it's a nice idea, but they need to be easily distinguishable in game and those look very similar, and probably more so on screen with other stuff going on around them.
-
I'm all for improvements like this to the tracking station. With a lot of stuff in there the current system just doesn't give us the flexibility we need.
-
Yes, I like that idea.
A warning message on loading too would draw your attention to the fact that it needs fixing.
-
Essentially what this boils down to is that all contracts need to be worded clearly and accurately to avoid any ambiguity (just like RL). That naturally includes specifying exactly which part(s) are required and what to do with them.
-
I always assume that there will be some changes to how things work, any part performance balancing is bound to affect something. I would guess that if you finish or land any critical or complex ships before you update then any impact will be minimal.
Keep your current version, and copy your save into the new one, then if it is broken you can still finish it anyway.
-
Put a decoupler on top of the cabin , but upside down (arrows pointing at the cabin), and add the intake or nosecone to that.
When out of the atmosphere decouple it and the decoupler will stay attached to the nose cone and fall away leaving the hatch exposed.
-
Agreed, that's always bugged me a little, it does seem very odd that a claw can grab the surface of an asteroid, but not the surface of a planet or moon.
-
I'm not in principle against Steam Workshop, but if that then means that the services it provides, either now or in the future, are not then going to be available to those not on steam then no definitely not.
Ultimately I think the best solution is a squad 'official' system that is available to all. The other unofficial systems could, I suppose, still be used by those who want to if that is practical.
-
19 hours ago, MKI said:
The volume thing is an OK suggestion, no problems to that. I have other problems with the default level of volume anyways, but assuming thats fixed a master column should be available.
But the last date played wouldn't even help most players since Steam keeps track of that anyways. I can't think of many games that have this feature, cuse its kind of a throw away thing that is kind of "big brother like". Especially for a single player game.
The volume suggestion is a logical one, certainly wouldn't hurt, won't have any impact on gameplay and probably not too difficult to implement.
I think that 'date last played' would be useful info to include too, it wouldn't make much difference to me really, but it would be nice to know.
So yes, why not to both ideas.
-
Nice thinking Temstar.
I think some sort of distance warning would be helpful. Maybe the 'danger area' could be linked to the number of nukes present and the amount of radiation also varies with distance. A Geiger counter type function (part?) could be used to warn of the level of radiation present.
-
When Thomfurt's lander ran out of fuel during the descent he had to bail out and use his jetpack to give himself a fighting chance.
He fought well, luckily his trajectory took him into the Mohole so 'ground level' was a lot lower than it would have been so he had a lot longer to lose that extra velocity. He rattled off the sides a bit on the way down and probably soiled his spacesuit too, but fortunately KSP doesn't simulate everything (now there's an interesting idea for a mod) but was able to descend to the bottom alive and intact.
Then the polar terrain glitch kraken got him... He bounced around like a pinball in the bottom of the Mohole for ages and I just couldn't get him stable enough to use his pack to fly him out, eventuality he settled in the bottom, half in and half out of the terrain and laid still in typical ragdoll fashion. Whenever I tried to switch to him in an attempt to save the poor soul it crashed the game, all I could do was go to the tracking station and terminate him. He is remembered by a flag plaque placed by the next visitor, who landed properly, but stuffed his take off big time and piled into a mountain.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought we could rename flags in the tracking station. If we can't then I think it should be possible.
To be able to click on a flag and rename it like we do vessels would be a good addition too.
I have mixed feelings about editing the plaque though, maybe it should only be doable if a kerbal is there in person. Another option could be to just allow it for a limited time after placing so that we can correct typos but not lose the permanent nature of them.
-
Yes, I like the OP's idea to add this couple of 'tweakable' things to the airbrakes, it gives a few more useful opions without really adding complexity, and a flat airbrake part would also be a welcome addition.
-
19 minutes ago, Kerba Fett said:
I found that line in the latest Dev Blog to be pretty interesting. Last april when they made a big fuss out of leaving early access I assumed there wasn't a lot of work to do. Now it's 8 months later, they're still adding features and they've gone back to admitting that the game is nowhere near finished. So when will it be finished? Later this year? 2017? Is there even an estimate?
I for one would be happy enough with a nice stable 64 bit version so I could choose my own mods without running out of memory rather than waiting for Squad to build all their favorite mods into the stock game.
They've already spent plenty of time to make stock versions of Kethane, FAR, and Deadly Reentry. Version 1.1 is supposed to have the stock version of Remote Tech.
Instead of spending time to duplicate what someone else has already done, why not work on stuff that modders can't do? More interactive IVA's that we can move around in would be a great start. Perhaps working on the performance of ships ships with high part counts would be possible. Maybe they could do some official modding tutorials rather than the random patchwork of info that's out there now.
I'm sure there's a huge list of things that only squad can do if they weren't distracted by trying to add new content that modders have already done.
'Finished' is very subjective, there are always new things they can add or old things they can tweak, so it probably never will be 'finished' as such.
-
10 hours ago, MKI said:
Make a new game for Kerbal Submarine Program and Kerbal Rover/Car/Train/ Program
Many others and I all play this game to go to space. Everything else goes with that concept. The water change allows players to get a space plane to land on Laythe, and Kerbin. Yes you can make a boat, but that is just a by-produce.
I see there being a lot of fun mods for this sort of stuff, since the game is capable of doing it. But the current implementations are fine. Id rather not have any prop parts, or sub parts taking up space for my space parts.
I do get your point here, though I do disagree a bit.
Yes the game is, and should remain, about space, flying spaceships and exploring the solar system we are given. A few extra parts that enable us to explore more of that solar system (under the oceans of Laythe for example) can enhance the game overall. Yes there is a potential risk of adding too much of some things like specialised submarine parts and so changing the apparent focus of the game (several have complained about the dominance of plane parts for example), but that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be any. Many of the parts can have 'crossover' uses, how many spacecraft use MK2 and MK3 'plane' parts? And electric propellers could have dual atmospheric and submarine uses if carefully implemented.
So IMO there is a place for a few specialised parts to cater for, and give a few different options for, atmospheric and oceanic uses.
-
7 hours ago, CliftonM said:
Sorry about that. Have some rep.
Thanks. Much appreciated.
It's not all bad, it is an old set up (half decent mid range in 2009), I was looking to upgrade soon anyway, I just didn't want to be forced into it.
At least it means I have a decent excuse to get a new machine (ready for 1.1
). All being well I'll be 'back in orbit' in a week or two after I get my head around balancing my wants, needs and budget.
-
My PC just died - so NOTHING.
Consoling myself on the forums instead.
-
Depending on how you look at it, In effect the stock system does let you 'reuse' parts. You get cash credited for recovered parts which then pays for the next one so it's effectively 'free'. So, in game play terms, it's the same as using the same one again without the added complexity of storage and having multiple places to get parts from.
What some of the recovery mods do is calculate whether or not dropped stages would reach the ground safely if they leave physics range (and would normally get deleted automatically), by taking into account what parachutes etc ate fitted, and give you credit for them as if they were recovered normally.
-
Yes, more flexible sorting of the tracking station flights would be a good thing.
A 'folder' type system (as has been mention several time before) would IMHO be a good solution. Then we could arrange things exactly how we want and show/hide flights by folders as required.
-
8 hours ago, 073198681 said:
Well, wouldn't that be just developing more "cargo bays" and parts? Shouldn't that take just as much time as any other update?
Same as last quote. I do not know anything about programming, but, since Squad managed to get cargo bays into the game with ease, shouldn't this work by the same principles? Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you.
Well, the main thing that impedes motion in kerbal spacesuits is the massive helmet. Remove that, and you can move around much more freely in any cramped space. I say we leave the free movement to the larger, less cramped science modules/ crew storages. When a kerbal enters a command capsule from the inside, he instantly sits down at the controls and cannot be moved around the capsule.
Good thought, though. I'ma like that comment.
I'm not a programmer either so I don't actually 'know' how much work is involved, but it isn't just 'making new parts' (which I guess is relatively straightforward). It's the other stuff that needs programming in order to make it actually work in a meaningful way that I think could be the difficult part.
-
I'm not keen on the idea of an overall 'play through story/campaign mode' similar to what we get with CoD etc. (If that's why the OP is suggesting) as I think that could just be too limiting. But I can see the value of a few short story type 'sets' of connected missions as linked tutorials.
-
Not a bad idea, I quite like that.
The problem I can see with having the mark on the docking port part is that it may be difficult to get them lined up properly (or easy to forget to do) when building the ship, especially if you are building a ship that you want to dock with one already in orbit and can't remember where your mark was.
One workaround is to add something like a light (which will also help you to see when you try to dock in the dark) to your ships which can serve as alignment markers. You can add two lights to each ship to maintain symmetry and use the right click menu to change the colours, so red could be up and green down.
). All being well I'll be 'back in orbit' in a week or two after I get my head around balancing my wants, needs and budget.
That feeling
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
Yeah. The first orbit, Mun landing and docking in particular are incredible milestones that gave me a huge buzz.
When a newcomer posts about achieving the same things I feel their pride too, and remember when I was in their shoes.