tseitsei89

Members
  • Content count

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

147 Excellent

1 Follower

About tseitsei89

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer
  1. This. So much this. It would make KSP so much more awesome. New procedurally created planets for every save AND a fog-of-war (fog-of-exploration) like mechanic. First we would only know the approximate orbits of the few bigger planets. Then we build (orbital) telescopes to figure out more precise orbits and masses for the planets and to find more celestial bodies (smaller planets and moons). Then we send probes to interesting bodies to further study their composition/atmosphere/good landing locations/gravity. And after that we might send kerbals to land on those bodies because we have studied them extensively enough to get all the parameters needed to be able to design a functioning lander for those circumstances. All this would add that incredible sense of exploring new things and achieving something new to the game and that feeling would remain there from save to save since you can never know what you'll find if you start a new save That is what would make ksp THE game of all time IMHO (dont get me wrong it still is one of the very best games I have ever played).
  2. I have rendezvous done and I started working on docking script. Then I got sucked away by rss/ro and usi kolonization on normal ksp and writing a hovercraft driving script for kos... But yeah. This is stillinteresting. There are just too many interesting thongs going on for me in ksp right now
  3. Regardless it is still worth using as much of Burbarrys dv as possible since, as @herbal space program already mentioned above, it is effectively "double effective dv"
  4. Ok thanks. I knew it was a real intended thing. The speed at which it happens just surprised me completely... Another question: is there a way to filter engines in the VAB while building so I could filter out all that use lqdH and lqdO?
  5. There is a navball in the EVA view nowadays isnt there? Or am I remembering everything completely wrong?
  6. I'm still quite new to RO and am running to a problem I seem to be unable to solve... Whenever I'm putting lqdHydrogen or lqdOxygen in to my tanks they just boil off in a matter of just few days. Even if I'm usin cryogenic tanks. So my question is how can I get them to stay in their tanks? Most of the engines are using lqdH and lqdO or at least lqdO and something else and I obviously cant use those engines for anything beyond LEO for now...
  7. Actually EVA packs have some hundreds of m/s worth of deltav and if the dv for whole mission is 2.xy km/s that extra dv from EVA pack is very significant...
  8. Wow! @ManEatingApe that was one awesome entry!
  9. Ok I'll try to be more constructive this time but here are still some observations: 1. How is this challenge scored? 2. What counts as "christmas-tree shaped" station? That is quite vague definition.
  10. Kerbal engineering only gives you information. It doesnt affect to actually controlling the ship in any way whatsoever
  11. I recently made this. Yeah the code is REALLY ugly but it works (most of the time). But my point was that you can use ship:geoposition:lng and ship:geoposition:lat coordinates for the loop and compare those to the latitude and longitude of the launchpad. That way you get negative values as well
  12. Is there any good mod(pack) for colonization in RSS/RO? I would like to try and build independent (or at least as independent as possible) bases/colonies on other planets/moons but I need a mod that can simulate resource harvesting and has some good parts for base building.
  13. This is awesome thread OP just keeps changing the rules every other post... How do you honestly think anyone can make a legit entry to this challenge if you change the rules and criteria once a day? You know it takes time to plan and execute a good entry for a challenge like this and it is really irritating if you take the time to plan a good ship just to find out that the OP of the challenge has (once again) decided to change the rules...
  14. A good idea IMO. First you compare the number of launches. And if that is the same you compare in-game time. That way we can have a real nice competition I believe. But I am mostly interested in how low can people get on the number of launches. Is 2 doable for example? 3 probably is. Not sure though. I haven't played career that much...
  15. Ok that's totally fine then and yeah I am considering making an entry but I am also tempted to play more RSS/RO I downloaded 2 days ago. Yesterday I got to the moon and back and now I'm planning a manned Mars mission already. It's like playing a brand new game! I strongly recommend it for anyone who is starting to get bored to the normal game (or is starting to think that normal KSP might be a little too easy/unrealistic).