• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

222 Excellent

1 Follower

About tseitsei89

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah I learned a lot about dv and orbital mechanics etc too but having to do the same calculations for millionth time is not that fun or educational anymore... The learning curve is hard enough in this game for new players already even with these tools. Plus seeing the figures doesnt help much if you have no idea what they mean so you kind ox have to learn that stuff anyway. It just takes out the extra grind needed to manually calculate those numbers for every single rocket you build...
  2. Aaahh. Then better scores might be possible since "docking" becomes reasonable option with manouver nodes. I might have to give this another look...
  3. What do you need 10000 part crafts for? I can probably give you some tips how to reduce your part count to reasonable numbers...
  4. Not sure what you are talking about... I'm playing on an old laptop and I can launch 100+ part ships just fine. ~200 parts starts to be a problem but you rarely need that many parts on a ship. Also they have already stated that KSP2 will be much more optimized than KSP1 so there is also that
  5. Of course not every planet, but there needs to be some resource that is not availible on Kerbin to encourage people to colonize at least ONE planet. Sure! I didn't suggest having only one resource on a planet or only one planet having some resource. But cruising through the game (unlocking all the tech and all the parts etc.) by just grinding satellite contracts while never leaving the Kerbin SOI shouldn't be possible. You can do that if you want but then you won't "finish" the game. That is how progress mode works in games. You have to do harder/more advanced stuff as you progress. If you don't want to do that you can just stay at low tech and do missions you already know how to do, but then you shouldn't be rewarded with progress (new tech etc.). If you don't even want to try and progress you can always play sandbox. That is not a real problem since there will always be a new launch window if you just timewarp more. Yes I really hope LS is in the game. It is such an important part about real life spaceflight. And it would also make production rates matter since without it time is essentially free and you can just timewarp how far you want ifyou have even a tiny smidgeon of production going on... No progression mode in any game can work if it gives player a complete freedom. That is just sandbox. Also penalizing and rewarding are essentially the same thing... I mean you could think that a) I don't want to colonize a planet with metallic hydrogen manufacturing capabilities, so I am penalized by not having access to metallic hydrogen. OR b) I used this time and effort to build this colony so now I am rewarded with some metallic hydrogen. You see it's just a matter of perspective. EDIT: probably a good resource unavailable on kerbin would be something that is needed for interstellar travel. That way you could still fly around current kerbol system all you want but you need to actually do something new to access the more advanced stuff and new solar systems. Or if you just want to explore them right away you can play sandbox...
  6. As already stated, with timewarp it doesnt matter if the extraction process takes 1day or 100years. You can just warp until you have enough. Some kind of lifesupport requirement might fix this. Another problem is that if you make slightly more expensive/time consuming it will still be faster/cheaper than building a completely new base. And if you go the other way and make it very expensive people will still feel that they are forced to build bases. Ofcourse in sandbox everything can be readily availible in VAB so you can play that if you dont want to expand your space program to other planets/systems but would rather fly whatever missions you want...
  7. No no no no. All resources should NOT be found on all planets (and definitely not be "buyable" from ksc or be mineable on kerbin). That would make building bases useless once again like in ksp1. There needs to be some advanced resources that you can ONLY get by colonising other celestial bodies. That way you have an actual reason to build cool bases.
  8. As I said earlier in this topic, maybe you cant find all advanced fuels/materials on Kerbin and you need to mine and refine those elsewhere in order to be able to use lategame engines and such...
  9. Hopefully KSP2 will have some more advanced fuels and/or materials that you can't just purchase from VAB (except in sandbox mode) but you have to set up colonies in interesting locations and make those big enough so they can mine and refine those so you can use them. That would be an interesting and natural mechanic to make base building more interesting/necessary.
  10. Yes, copy of the original space shuttle seems impossible with this budget indeed.
  11. Yes and that is exactly why we would need a proper definition of a shuttle from the OP. Is spaceplane a shuttle? If I took your craft above and attached small wing strakes/fins on it, would that make it a shuttle even though it still doesn't look like a shuttle or fly like a shuttle.
  12. Well OP has not even replied what he meant by the word "shuttle". What makes craft a shuttle? If we don't have properly defined rules we can't know what to do. But yeah I can make a craft that costs less than 5000 funds, goes to minmus and returns safely to kerbin.
  13. There is a <5000 funds craft landing to duna and returning in there. Obviously the same craft could easily go to minmus and back...
  14. As you said modders have already been able to significantly beautify KSP1 so I am sure that professional game developers can beautify KSP2. I am still not convinced that KSP is a game that is fun in multiplayer but maybe they find a fun way to implement it. There are so many ways it CAN be don though. This is not hard. Better time warp mod already adds faster timewarp. There are also mods that allow accelerating with faster timewarps. Just implement those and maybe something like Kerbal Alarm Clock and problem is solved. We can already build huge bases on the surface if we want in KSP1. There is just not much reason to do that (other than that it looks cool). There has also already been mods (like Extraplanetary launchpads) that let you build and launch crafts off-world. And again I am sure professional game developers can do at least as well as modders. This is the only point I am actually worried about. I REALLY don't want the game to be dumbed down and made too easy to attract new players. I want a game with some challenge. Yes it is a massive task but making a good game is always a massive task. KSP1 was basically made from scratch and it turned out to be ok. This is not that big of a big task. This is just a design choice that you have to do really early on. KSP1 was already quite mod friendly so I don't see why KSP2 wouldn't be also.
  15. True but as you said it would "break" the gravity elsewhere...