Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mycroft

  1. 0/10 cause I havent been on the forums in two years
  2. Today I went back and revitalized my ancient 1.1.2 save with my mega jool mission and am sending almost 20 craft there.... should be fun!
  3. Man it has sure been a while since I was on! @katateochi I've been liking the KerbalX updates!
  4. Odd, same for me. It occurs on both the first edit page, and the normal one. Glad to know I'm not the only one noticing it. I too and using chrome for this, but six months ago, it worked fine, I wonder what happened....
  5. Very low indeed But I found another thing, why does the site freeze when I try to add tags on my craft? It didnt used to do that but I made a new upload, and I hit space after typing my usual CMAU tag, and it froze my browser... idk whats wrong Any ideas?
  6. @katateochi Found a small bug with the little rocket that scrolls to the top of the page. If I scroll down fast enough, the rocket can still go below the pad: It is way better than it used to be, but it is still there. This is of course minor lol, but thought you'd like to know.
  7. Thanks, I'm glad you like them! I decided to go with Sentinel for the second one, and I got the two of them side by side: https://imgur.com/a/lOBJ2 and one is definitely bigger lol. Any way you can think either of them can be improved?
  8. I wouldnt put it past him to include it, but honestly, I think you're fine. The likely-hood is small it seems. Meanwhile, in my long absence I have made two stock space battleships I was rather proud of. The first one is an Azimov class destroyer named the Spectre, ( https://kerbalx.com/Mycroft_33/Spectre ) and the second is as yet unnamed, https://imgur.com/a/WRSia , and I wanted feedback on how good these ships seemed. Anyone? Thanks, Mycroft
  9. Thought: If the mod is like completely required for legacy, why not package it in the download? Or is that a dumb question?
  10. Thanks Jade! Yeah if a mod isnt working, add more! I figured it might be something like that, installling community resource pack now. Also I saw that SOMEBODY was listed as an OPT dev! Congrats! Yay it worked, thanks!
  11. Hi, so I know its been a while but I FINALLY got a new computer! Yay! So of course I had to install KSP, right? And then duh I have to install my favorite mod, OPT! First I confirmed it launched stock, then when I popped OPT normal and legacy with all bundled mods and ships, (basically FireSpitter) and the game got a null ref on the part OPT_Legacy/Parts/Engines/SAGE/OPT_SAGE/opt_sage. I'd provide the log, but tbh, its been a while and I forgot where it was. I'll upload it if someone shows me where it is. Thanks, hope you all have a wonderful day! I'm off to bed for now.
  12. That would be it. Firespitter is a mod required to make the fuel tank setup work. Without it the mod has nullrefs.
  13. I do not know, just that context is important I dont personally have 1.3.
  14. So I've not had the chance to be on the forums all that much, with this new game called real life being quite demanding , but there is one rumor I have consistently been hearing that deeply concerns me. Paid DLC. This is never a good move by any game developer, I don't care who you are. I have recently been hearing that KSP will now have paid DLC. Are these rumors true? See if you talk to the average guy on the street who hasn't played KSP, they usually are of the opinion that the game is overpriced. Now you and I know that the 40 bucks you pay will give you thousands of hours of enjoyment, but they dont, so they see it as overpriced. Many people I convinced to play KSP balked when they heard the price. And its not like 40 bucks is all that much, but they still balked, even though I mentioned the thousands of hours most get out of it. Why. Just why. Now if I was a potential customer under the misguided impression KSP was slightly over-priced, and then I heard that paid DLC was a thing, that would be an instant turn off for me, because every single game with piad DLC added went down the same road: The devs had a good game maybe with some free DLC from the community, that did well, then it got sold to another company. They wanted to make more money, so they added some paid DLC, originally as just plain add ons, but nobody really bought them because the free DLC plus the stock game worked just fine. Or even just plain stock. Then the devs realized that to get people to buy this, they had to put something in that made the paid DLC better than the free stuff. There are two ways to do this. One more drastic way is to take from stock and put in paid DLC, and the other was to put some new element or bug fix in paid DLC that players simply could not do without. So in essence, they had to force the players to buy paid DLC because the community free stuff was better. Paid DLC does not have its own market, so it must take from somewhere to make one. There must be demand for something to sell. Basic economics. Paid DLC isn't something that is naturally desirable, so they must make players want or need it. Both roads are a very bad turn, and it always marks the beginning of the end for the game. There's a good reason for this too. If you start doing that, entirely aside from whether it is a money grab move or not (even though I cant see how it wouldn't be, but I'm giving KSP a lot of slack) the community sees it that way and resists. Once your devs are fighting the community, that is death to the game. And eventually it ends up where stock is basically so awful that the game is unplayable without paid DLC. If it's worth paying for, it's worth adding to the stock game. There can be official DLC, and I see that is the case, but it must be free of charge. If not, you are falling down a very slippery slope that will be the end of the game. So I suppose I'm looking for reassurance that my favorite game is not going down the drain by putting out paid DLC. If it is, I will be forced to grab the versions I can, and hunker down and stop getting new updates. The DLC may have great content. I'm not arguing that. What I am saying is it cannot cost a single penny because then we risk falling off this edge. That is not a risk we can take. This community is amazing but every time the dev team changes or a major change is made, then there's always the people who cry: "This is the death of KSP!" Take the devs leaving. Hooooooo boy that caused a ruckus. And that wasnt the worst one. Just a recent one. But if we go down the road of paid DLC, that will really be the beginning of the end for KSP. We may be a while in dying cause KSP has a fiercely loyal community which is amazing, but the end is inevitable if you go down that road. Because for a game to make a steady profit, new people must buy it. Paid DLC is a fast way (one of the fastest ways) to turn off any potential customers, no matter how awesome the game. And the community already there doesnt exactly want to pay for the new DLC either. So as well as asking for reassurance, I am also pleading with our devs to either never go down that road or if they have already started, then to pull out while they still can. Because once you commit to that road, it is very hard to go back, because then your reputation is ruined. Then paid DLC becomes just about the only way you can make a profit any more. Then that stops. KSP has a lot of life in it. Please please do not ruin it by putting paid DLC in the works. That is death. Game devs in general shouldn't make DLC really, they are kinda supposed to, you know, develop the game. But we can make slack for it like if some stuff wasnt quite polished enough to make the actual game then having it as DLC is cool. But paid DLC is just a bad idea all around. Please tell me my favorite game isn't going down this route. Sincerely, Mycroft, CEO of CMAU Incorporated
  15. @katateochi So I went to upload a new ship and entered this album ID "wmgkD" and pressed next, expecting to be taken to the editing page but it gave me an error! So then I canceled the upload and tried again. I tried it without the album, and it seemed like it worked, but the instant I entered the album ID in the place of the default picture, it immediately gave me an error screen upon saving. This hasn't happened before to me when I tried to upload with an album. What is wrong with the site?
  16. I like the idea of a dialogue saying that you are leaving the site and you are not responsible for any content beyond this point. I think that it's a wise precaution. I like this one too. Perhaps you could do both. You know, have a dialogue to redirect you and a reporting system for inappropriate links (suspended account for 1 day first offense, 4 days 2nd offense, 1 week 3rd offense, perma ban 4th offense or something like that) but youd have to have a way to verify the reports are not just trolls trying to screw people over for fun. Mebbe have a way to contest the report by PMing you and a few select people you trust or something.... its tough because there will always be a way to abuse a report system, but the dialogue for me is kinda a must.
  17. LOL! That was the first thing my friend thought it was! Its beer, but with more... punch! You'll feel it more.... it has a heck of a hangover...
  18. Working on an orbital missile defense platform, a static missile platform designed to hit any ships nearby, useful for enforcing planetary blockades:
  19. it would seem simple to me to count it as a mod craft, since all mods are DLC really, but mebbe you can call it like "SQUAD Official DLC" or something. The 'stock+' idea seems overly complex and too ambiguous... if I was a noob to KerbalX and KSP, I might look for craft with the official DLC in which case the search by mod feature works fine. But if I saw "Stock+" I know I'd go: "What the heck is stock plus? Is it some thing for elite KSP players? Is it like stock but better?" Because to me stock plus says "Im a deluxe version of stock" and not "Im a SQUAD made DLC" In the end i think it just works better if you treat it as any other mod since it is not in the stock game, it is downloadable. I think 'stock+' is too confusing. Know what I mean?
  20. Yeah funny thing is, I feel like I've built enough big ships with heavy armor made from 2x2s so I specially built this one without a single one on it, so it has no armor but a ton of weapons. I find when I used 2x2s part count skyrocketed. Also an even weirder thing, I havent been able to damage test it because it seems to be glitched and every missile I use against it did no damage to the actual ship. It was so weird. I've never seen that before. I musta checked that crash damage was enabled like 15 times and it always was.
  21. @Greymangames cool looking ship! I would suggest as far as part count, get rid of your missiles and replace them with missiles made of a pocket edition I-beam and two or four sepratrons. They are very part efficient, and surprisingly accurate. i used them in my design and you can have a lot of them, giving effectively more firepower. This may not exactly save you parts if you use a lot more missiles but it will give you tons more firepower for your partcount. There are a lot of good suggestions for other ways to save parts in other posts, i would personally implement as many as possible and save that version of the ship so you can go back to it if it doesnt work. Meanwhile, I was wondering if anyone had any feedback at all for my ship? Also any name ideas? Top: Bottom: She has a lot of fire power and i managed to get it to 602 parts. Anyone have ideas?
  22. @JTpopcorn I tried that and it worked quite nicley IMHO, plus it took me down to 602 parts so yay! Thanks for the suggestion!
  • Create New...