duckunlimited2
-
Posts
161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by duckunlimited2
-
-
Ookay, I just got me a copy of Heartgold to play with.
However, I don't want to go through the same routine of finding the coolest pokemon EVARRR and teaching it the coolest strongest moves it can in order to simply sweep the npc competition and win the game easy. Nope, I wanted a bit more complexity to my team and their moves this time. So I did a bit of research onto competitive pokemon play and took some of their concepts to create an interesting well-rounded team of six. Here is the result of hours of research and balancing:Format runs as follows:
Pokemon:Move 1, Move 2, Move 3, Move 4
Meganium: Light Screen, Toxic, Aromatherapy, Giga Drain
Ampharos: Rain Dance, Thunder, Thunder Wave, Focus Punch
Heracross: Brick Break, Mega Horn, Rest, Sleeptalk
Umbreon: Baton Pass, Substitute, Mean Look, Assurance
Starmie: Psychic, Surf, Recovery, Rapid Spin
Cloyster: Spikes, Ice Shard, Explosion, Clamp
I took alot of time thinking on what roles each pokemon will do and moves that best fit its role. Pokemon like Heracross and Cloyster are designed to be more independent so they were easy to choose moves for. However, support pokemon like Umbreon and Meganium were harder to choose moves for because I wanted their moves to reflect the needs of other members, but still allow them to be somewhat independent so that they are not completely dependent on other members to K.O. opponents. Anyways, their are some iffy moves that I'm not sure with. Ampharos's Focus Punch is a good example as i don't have a sure fire way of making it hit all the time. Other moves, like Starmie's Rapid Spin, I'm more concerned with my actual usage of its move due to the fact I'm not playing in the competitive field but in the story mode.
This leads me to my final concern: Will other moves not designed to maim the enemy end up not being used at all? In essence, will the difficulty level of the game be too little for my team's set up and will I end up just reverting back to my all sweeper attack ways and all my effort will be for naught? I think yes. So I Want some self imposed rules and restrictions to up the difficulty level.
So I ask of the space simulator community for some suggestions: What can I do to ramp up difficulty to make this team useful, but not too difficult to make it not fun. I'm thinking of keeping my pokemon under leveled would be the right path but I'm not sure on how. Also, again I'm iffy on some moves so if you can make a suggestion on a move change, that be great but please give me reasons why so I can better judge if its good or not.
Thoughts, suggestions, random nostalgic moments of your first pokemon game, all are welcome! as long as we stay loosely on the topics path. Thank You
-
The last thing that i want to do is do surgery on my laptop. Its a scary proposition to me and looking at that guide, it appears it takes alot of taking apart just to get the monitor. However, on the third page there is a link that just shows how to get to the screen. I might do that and see if a loose cable is there. If not, ill take it to the shop thanks
-
I actually think that I should post this topic in a computer forum instead of a space sim forum but there is an off-topic section for a reason and i believe the expertise and talent pool is sufficient enough.
So a few hours ago when I went to boot up my laptop, my screen did not successfully boot up with my computer. It didn't show the windows boot up animation and the following...erm... "choose a user screen", desktop-like...thingy........place, thing. Err. Yeah it didn't show any startup animations but I knew it successfully booted up because it played that characteristic winodws boot-up sound. I tried restarting my computer but that didn't work. So to better diagnose what was wrong, I plugged my tv via hdmi cables to my laptop and I am able to see things with the tv monitor. I went to the hardware manager and checked the laptop screen and it said it was working properly, which obviously it wasn't. I think my computer screen is damaged somehow. I brought it to school with me today and I accidentally bumped my bag into another person. Wasn't super hard but it was moderate. No visible damage can be seen anywhere on my laptop. It just refuses to display anything. Now it isn't a completely black screen. On startup it flashes grey then a whiter grey, then it settles in a grey screen. So there is some light coming from it.
So do you think my monitor is damaged, or is it a software glitch. Should I get it checked out at a pc repair place?
Oh, don't know if this would help but my screen is an LCD. My computer model is a toshiba satellite a665.
-
Here's my little plane on Eve. this thing is pretty fast on kerbin. I clocked it going 200-300m/s on below 5000m on kerbin. Possible faster. Very maneuverable too. I thought this would be a fun plane to fly around Eve with. That didn't pan out well:
here's our brave kerbonaught, Genezon kerman, who just arrived on the surface of the planet with his little spaceplane.
ATTEMPT TAKE OFF IN 3 2 1...
...... well that was anti climatic. I could only climb up to 100m in the air. I need to keep this ludicrous nose pitch just to keep from descending. And I can only go around 12m/s.
He later tried landing back but ended up destroying his plane when he hit invisible water. I'm working on a rescue mission right now.
-
the game spawns the plane relative to where it is in the hangar. If the plane is high up in the hangar, it would spawn high up in the air. Just place the plane down near the bottom of the hangar and it should solve the problem
-
DA Second picture. I'm back on a laptop so I can explain my suggestion. It works because when you hit apoapsis of your transfer orbit, your craft moves slower around that point in its orbit then jool so it would be logical to position your craft infront of jool so as to allow it to catch up and take you. However, depending on the distance and how fast jool's closes, sometimes you end up dropping too far down in your orbit and jool will sail pass above you. To counter this, burning up will keep you from falling down to a lower orbit. Evidence is seen when you actually perform it: apoapsis will start moving to the front of your craft indicating that you will be climbing again. Do this enough times (may be 1 or 100 depending on how inaccurate you are) and patch conics will eventually tell you of an intercept.
i would perform the plane change after you've done your transfer burn. Just lay the map view horizontal so that your tranfer orbit looks like a flat line. Pivot your camera left or right until jool's orbit looks like a single straight line that intersect yours. At that point where they intersect is where you would perform the plane change so wait till your ship gets there. If jools orbit is heading down, burn on the 180 line at the equator of the navball. if jools orbit is up, burn on reverse side of the navball. It should be the N longitude at the equator. If you can't tell which direction jools orbit is heading, flip a coin and decide. Its easy to see the orbit change so you would know if you chose right or if you need to burn the opposite way.
-
Spikeyhat, plan your transfer a bit early then your calculations tell u. If that doesnt work, wait till u just pass apoapsis of the early transfer orbit and then burn up (like stick ur navball cursor on the north pole of the navball kinda up thing). That will move apoapsis back infront of you. Wait for you to pass your new apoapsis again then repeat until patch conics gives u an intercept. Love to explain how this works but im posting this via phone so just trust me.
-
So I stranded a lone kerbal on the surface of EVE a day ago. Since he was the first kerbal in my game to ever set forth on another planet, I thought it be best to bring him back home. As you know, with a gravity 1.7 stronger than kerbin's, and a bigger and thicker atmosphere, getting off the planet will be a challenge. So any suggestions on getting into orbit from the surface of EVE?
I just need it to get in orbit, another vessel will rendezvous with it later to bring them home.
My initial thoughts were to use a spaceplane design with srb boosters. However, if there is a more economical design that saves on weight ill go for it. Remember, i need to bring this thing from kerbin to EVE.
-
Yep. Ive been humbled. Upon my own testing in game, i have found out that i am wrong. Sending a craft that weighs 13.6kmu from kerbin altitude to a hypothetical planet located 60gm with an intermediary orbit located 30gm wastes about 380 fuel units more than just sending your craft straight up to the planet.
As a guide meant for ease of understanding, practicality, and versatility (like a one size fits all type of thing) it accomplishes its goal quite respectively. However, its not a custom tailored suit. So its not the best option in most cases.
-
Kosmo-not, can you please label what each burn is accomplishing so I can.... well see what each burn is accomplishing.
And a further inquiry: Did any of those burns simulate a burn to park the craft in orbit with the target planet? Remember my argument is that I agree it takes more delta v to set up the intermediary orbit and transfer, but it makes up for it by reducing the necessary delta v needed for it to park in orbit.
edit: Oh If I am proven wrong, can you tell me why my method's wastes delta v. I would want to know where my thinkings gone wrong.
Edit: Oh, just looked at your post again. I see now that you did do a parking orbit. scratch that second part. I also believe that these calculations take in consideration the Oberth effect right. I can see how that works against me in the realm of your calculations. But now that I think about it, I'm not that entirely sure that your calculations truly reflect the game mechanics. More specifically I honestly don't think the Oberth effect is reflected in the game. As far as I can see, the community just accepts the fact that the Oberth effect IS reflected in game. However, no one has proven it does or it doesn't. So I think the next logical step is to determine if the Oberth effect is reflected or if it isn't. That should be the deciding the factor that either disproves or supports my rendezvous method. (Unless their is another factor working against me)
I'll repeat what your calculations say their doing in game (except I won't start in kerbin's SOI; I'll start outside it). That should directly prove or disprove the delta v problem and also prove or disprove the Oberth effects existence.
-
With that navball, i actually dont use the ksc marker at all. The orbital periods of both methods are both in a ratio of 2:1 (smaller orbit always being the one). When the navball spins, im not just measuring how far my craft goes around the orbit but also how far the planet goes as well in its orbit. I can do that because i know the orbital periods ratio. If the smaller orbit completes 1 orbit, the bigger completes a half. Therefore, because one can track both orbits in time, one can work out when the angle is right for a rendezvous burn.
In regards to the intermediary orbit being a wasteful energy effort i disagree to an extent. When we r captured by a soi via an H-transfer, ourpejected path is always an escape trajectory. There fore we must use delta v to prevent it. The question on how much do we use. It depends how fast we were when we entered the soi. Now if we imagine that we burn a transfer from kerbin to another planet. U would need alot of delta v to prevent the escape trajectory cause u r slow at the top. Now if we did some effort to first establish a intermediary orbit then transfer, the amount of delta v needed to prevent escape trajectory is less then the straight transfer. So much so, that it makes up the effort we put in to our intermediary orbit. Im no expert in delta v but the way imagine it makes sense.
-
Fixed, somewhat. I uncompressed the file and just uploaded it as is. The compression didn't compress it much anyway.
-
Hey y'all!
If you want to learn how to perform interplanetary rendezvous, i have created a PowerPoint (because I have no resources to create a video
) on the subject. I would love if you checked it out and gave me an opinion.Oh and I would be using this method to get to the planets. (just trying to stay on topic!)
Edit: OH YES!! we got our kerbal smileys back
I missed these things! -
Hi guys. I took some time off of my last days of summer vacation to create a guide on interplanetary rendezvous. Due to the limitation of photos we can upload here and my lack of video recording software, I have opted to format it in PowerPoint. Let me know what you think about it. Tell me if you have any problems viewing it or if you have trouble understanding it and I will best see how to remedy the situation.
Also, it is possible to test out the rendezvous methods yourself out in kerbol orbit. Just grab the lightest command module, put the stock ASAS module on it (it protects you from the space kraken) the smallest fuel tank and the lightest extrasolar engine on. Config the fuel in the tank and give yourself ridiculous amounts of fuel to give you enough leeway for practice. Strap it on a rocket to help get it out of Kerbin's surface and atmosphere and head off for solar orbit. With planets about to come out we need to prepare ourselves. So start practicing.
Here's the link to the ppt: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/97825123/THE%20PRACTICAL%20WAY.pptx
Have fun and good luck
-
YAY, Good going for ya mate.
-
That's an awesome idea. And in reply to someone else I think that the gas planet should have bands of yellow-green or yellow-blue. I can't quote the person, replying from my phone.
Sorry if this is off-topic but I can't resist pointing this out. A band of yellow-blue is just green. But thanks for replying to my suggestion.
-
Togfox, debris can't hit each other in this game. There all on-rails so collisions are impossible. If 2 debris did end up on a collision course, they would just go straight through each other.
-
I think the green on the gas giant is rather striking and exciting. However Just making it completely green makes it very one dimensional and, one can also argue, quite bland.
I'm throwing out a suggestion that our planets and moons, not just the gas giant, should be more multicolored. As an example, the gas giant can have a color palette stretching from vibrant green, to a yellowish green. a mixture of whitish green can be added. Maybe a sandy yellow to to give it more of an earthy feel.
(I'm an artist, I like colors
) -
that or extremely bored.
I've never heard of this cthulhu before. Why have I only started hearing about it now?
-
you could just escape kerbin orbit and then push out your kerbol orbit like you do to get to the mun except with another planet. Its not efficient but it works and requires little precision, just some patience in having to warp at 100,000 until you get within the influence of the planet. The problem is returning of course although i except space stations to make this a much simpler(though still extremely difficult) process.
Hunter its not all that easy. with the vast distances that exist outside kerbin's sphere of influence, you would actually find it extremely difficult to get back to kerbin without any sort of precision. You see, Kerbin's sphere of influence is actually extremely tiny when compared to these vast distances, which makes it extremely easy to miss. It feels like your trying to hit a target the size of a pinhead when you actually try. Trust me, I've gotten to a kerbol orbit around 7-8 billion in altitude and returned back to kerbin.
-
I just thought of a great idea. I think I can make a small interplanetary vehicle that's powered only by RCS. Never underestimate the power of RCS guys; I've got really small, single-staged, and light vehicles to land on the moons only using RCS starting from the surface of kerbin. I'm going to design one now.
-
Yay, lets check it out! *clicks on link' reads introductory, and scrolls down* ......... 0_o ...... o_O ...0_0 .. .... @.@ . I'll try and make sense of this at a better time than midnight. g night!
-
You wanted the url so here's the url. However let me warn you of a mistake most people make when they attempt this method: Many people assume altitude is the same thing as orbital radius. However its not. in order for you to derive orbital radius from altitude, you must add the planets/star's radius to the altitude to get orbital radius. After you convert it to orbital radius, you then can multiply the number by .63 or 1.59. (you'll understand that multiplying part once you read the guide) Remember that once your done multiplying, you need to convert it back to altitude so subtract the product by the planet/star's radius to finally get your starting altitude. Kerbin's radius is 600,000m by the way. Last time I checked, kerbol doesn't have any diameter but check to make sure.
And finally the link (don't post anything; remember its a dead thread) :http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/6642-How-to-rendezvous-with-other-orbiting-spacecraft?highlight=rendezvous+orbiting+satellite
I will recreate this thread before .17 comes out and improve on it to make it easier to understand. You can practice the method inside the Kerbin system with the moons (minmus is great for low-to-high method) or better yet your own target satellites (there better because gravity doesn't get in the way) You can also try and go out in kerbol orbit and try to rendezvous with kerbin if you dare. It is possible, I've done it before.
-
Oh, okay now I can see it. I was bit unsure if you actually made it to kerbol escape. I was looking at the screenshot of the crafts in orbit of kerbol and was very confused on what mechjeb was saying about the apoapsis and periapsis. I had no idea what Tm and Gm was. Good thing I googled it and I actually figured out what those units are.
Also I just realized that your crafts orbital speed is fast enough, at that altitude, to designate it as escape velocity. Very excellent Indeed.Also, you didn't have to start on the surface of Kerbin. I assumed you would create a craft and use the orbital construction mod to get it up to the 100x100km orbit. However, starting from the surface and making it to escape velocity is a great achievement.
Edit: I'll also add something about ARK 2.0 here because I hit my picture limit in its post.
Yes ARK 2.0 can reach escape velocity with half of its fuel remaining. However, with the 300kmu of dead weight attached, it cannot reach escape velocity. Instead it reaches an apoapsis of around 169,000,000,000m. However it was still close to reaching escape velocity. It just needed 500m/s more velocity until it hit escape velocity. If I packed just a bit more fuel, it could have hit escape velocity.
However, I don't want to go through the same routine of finding the coolest pokemon EVARRR and teaching it the coolest strongest moves it can in order to simply sweep the npc competition and win the game easy. Nope, I wanted a bit more complexity to my team and their moves this time. So I did a bit of research onto competitive pokemon play and took some of their concepts to create an interesting well-rounded team of six. Here is the result of hours of research and balancing:
) on the subject. I would love if you checked it out and gave me an opinion.
I missed these things!
I'm Going on an (pokemon) adventure!!! Need Suggestions
in The Lounge
Posted
Will do, but they will be on Hm slaves.