• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Panel

  1. I can't remember the name of this song, only the melody. It starts off with an instrumental version of it, and later on there are singers doing the same thing. I'm pretty sure it is/was a somewhat popular song. Included is a very bad rendering of it on Vocaroo. Please excuse both my terrible voice and the mic quality. I hope I can finally find someone who knows this song, and can help me name it.
  2. Here is my entry. Despite, or perhaps because, it's a deathtrap, it manages to go 109 m/s in level flight. I guess that's why they wear space suits. If I calculate correctly, my score is 5.54. EDIT: Here's an improved entry, with a slightly better score of 7.74.
  3. I'm not really sure this fits with the theme of the game...
  4. I have never needed 0.625 meter fairings, but ui have always wanted a heat shield in that size. All of my small atmospheric drop probes are forced to have a giant heat shield and fairing, adding unneeded mass and volume.
  5. Looking at Kommander, it doesn't really seem like what the game is built for. Career mode was originally meant to be played as the administrator of the space program. You are right, though, the system is very broken, and restricts the way you play. Career overhaul has been suggested several times recently, and the most recent up to date thread is found here.
  6. It's a game about rockets, and doesn't have very good aerodynamic modeling. Who needs plane parts and the runway? Seriously, though, this a good idea. I don't use hyperedit, so I always have found it hard to get my boats in the water.
  7. The thing is, I am playing with mods. I have Strategia, KCT, and Engineering Tech Tree as the most game-changing. I have not been able to find anything for better career overhaul, but it's still not up to snuff. That's why this thread is in Suggestions and Development. We are suggesting a way to improve the game.
  8. Yes, yes we do. We know that it's unlikely, but the current game is pretty broken.
  9. This is a great solution! Besides helping to reduce filler missions, it would give an actual reason to launch bases and stations. For balance, they could stop giving rep after a certain time. Also, I'm not sure about probes. They would do their science for rep pretty quickly, and probably wouldn't need this.
  10. Where did you hear this? I don't remember anything about it.
  11. You mean you want thermals and weather added? That would be pretty difficult. Although I like the idea, I don't think it will be stock.
  12. It isn't that difficult. It is already done with solar panels, and dev notes mentioned antennas in 1.2 will have the same effect.
  13. Why would you need to complete a whole program to get rep? Why not give portions of rep per mission? You would select the Mun landing program, and be given a program tree (which could either look like a mini tech tree, or not be visible, and use a similar UI to contracts now). When a mission is completed, you get rep, which gets you funds. You would also be offered the next set of missions. For example, when complete the Mun flyby mission, you could be offered both an orbital mission and a long duration multi-flyby mission. Each completed mission would give rep, and they would be much more rapid. Also, funds could be given in smaller amounts monthly, spreading it out to make it easier to do rapid-fire missions.
  14. This is almost exactly what I would want out of Career Mode! If there was anything I would add, it would be a different set of programs for crewed and and uncrewed missions, and being able select multiple programs at a time.
  15. A lot of recent suggestions on career mode is over in this thread, we discussed a lot about contracts and their weighting.
  16. As for how to keep missions organized: Rather than have each mission be to do x experiment in y biome, why not make two types of mission? One type could be to do a flyby/orbit/landing at the specified body, and the other could be to collect x science points from the body.
  17. Procedural parts is a discussion fir another thread. What those people are saying is that they would like another stock part size, just not all the parts to go with it. That is fine, I would just like that discussion to take place elsewhere.
  18. I believe that those in favor of procedural parts suggested that they be restricted in size based on tech tree progression.
  19. That seems very backwards. Apollo 11 knew that it would land on the moon and preform certain experiment months in advance.
  20. On other threads, 1.875 meter parts have had mixed thoughts. I think they're needed, but I wanted to see what the majority wants. I think they are, since going from 1.25 to 2.5 doubles the diameter, while 3.75 is only 150% larger. This makes any rockets with two sizes look very strange. Also, 1.25 meter rockets can only put small payloads into orbit on its own, while 2.5 meter is overkill for anything smaller than 10 tons or so.
  21. The goal of a program could be to collect a total of xyz science points from a body. This would encourage exploration in full, while still leaving players a choice of what experiments to run.
  22. This would definitely be very helpful. What I used to do was save each mission as a new craft file with minor modifications, but gave up when the vessel list got too long.
  23. What about long term experiments for space stations? They're pretty useless right now, with only the science lab really the only useful long-term science thing.
  24. Ah. I see. I didn't quite understand what you were saying, this makes sense. The things I would most like out of career mode would be: 1. Exploration programs, configurable in the admin building. These would give certain missions to do, which would get more involved as you complete previous ones. For example, the Mun program would give you missions to take crew to the Mun, starting in flybys, later orbital missions, then landings, and then eventually a base. Programs could be terminated at any time by the player. 2. A monthly budget, based on reputation. Reputation would be increased by doing missions related to the active program(s), and decrease slowly over time. The time it takes for reputation to decrease between missions depends on the time it takes to get to the body involved. 3. A part unlock system based on funds and time. This would basically work as @Veeltch suggested. The tech tree has different starting nodes to research, giving a bit of choice as to how to start the game. 4. Some sort of a construction time mechanic. These are the four changes want from career mode. It would really make stock more playable to me.