Duck McFuddle

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent


About Duck McFuddle

  • Rank
    Minmus enthusiast

Profile Information

  • Location Array
  • Interests Array

Recent Profile Visitors

526 profile views
  1. Most of the suggestions and development threads are about big changes - but how about the little ones? Post here about little things you want fixed/changed (bugs that annoy you, a part of the game that feels a little empty, etc.)
  2. More life on Kerbin would be great - and I cannot tell you how ridiculously happy I would be if they added newscasts and other "countries" - and the idea of that if you landed a Kerbal in a bad region you might have to pay a fine to get them out. This would prevent just plopping a capsule down wherever, and make you have to think more about your trajectory to be safe (just like what NASA would have to do back in the Cold War - landing some astronauts in the middle of the USSR might be a bad idea) Also, crashing rockets into cities might get you a bad rep on the news, leading to less contracts and of course lowered reputation points. However, completing missions would get you great news coverage and maybe even special grants from the Kerbal gouvernement. I'm probably taking this idea little too far but it's better to give too much than too little I guess.
  3. I'm pretty sure that at some point I made a thread for both IVA activity and submarines, so those are both a yes from me. I feel as though we already got stuff for an interplanetary based module overhaul with breaking ground and it's long term science experiments. Survivability I just find too difficult, as it just adds one more thing to forget when you are building a rocket. I'd love to have space stationa become useful, I love building them and more to do would be great. There was a great mod for this that I had once, but the name escapes me. A science overhaul would kind of be pointless, since I think we have a good enough science system already and with breaking ground it got even better. I don't want interstellar travel, mostly because it would cause lag and it having it be randomly generated would make it annoying if you saw somebody else with a star system you wanted but since it's random you won't ever get it. Maybe there could be a sort of "seed" that you could enter at the beginning and tell other people. Comets are just boring. Need I say more? Perhaps if there were some new science experiements made specially for comets it would intrigue me more. As for other countries, battling against an AI doesn't interest me that much, and it might be kind of boring sometimes. It could also get very buggy fast. Overall, if there were to be a new DLC I'd like it to be pretty minor, and I don't want anything that changes the style of KSP at all.
  4. I agree with 1, but for Kevin it's a solid no for 1.1 and 2. 1.1 makes Eve way to easy - Eve has its own challenge that has everything to do with the atmosphere. I don't like 2 mainly because it eliminates KSP's lego-like feel. KSP forces you to be creative, and being able to instantly make something whatever size you want would hurt KSP's overall vibe. SimpleRockets2 is a very different game from KSP, one that makes perfect sense with this kind of a feature, since SimpleRockets2 is a variant of SimplePlanes (which uses procedural parts to great extent). These two games are very different from one another, which is why you can buy both and have unique experiences with each.
  5. Yeah I had a lot of trouble getting mods to work at first as well, and my wild adventures in the realm of KSP files ended more than once with me breaking the game. I eventually got some to work, but half the time they don’t seem to work right. Most of the time I just keep mods turned off, pretty much just because it’s too much work and I don’t find them that useful.
  6. Whoops. I didn't read through all the answers (there are seven pages after all, and I'm lazy).
  7. This won't happen. It never will. It's impossible. I'll use an example from another post to explain. Let's say I'm flying a jet plane and trying to land it on the runway, and my friend is over in a Kerbol orbit. My friend wants to time warp to an Eve encounter. I'm coming in towards the KSC when my friend warps. Suddenly, my game speeds up, and I explode into a fiery mess after smashing into the VAB. It just doesn't work out. There ware ways around this, but not without making it incredibly boring for one player waiting for their friend to finally land, or without screwing up orbits. The second problem is reverting - if I crash my ship while my friend just landed on Minmus, then when I revert he will go back to wherever he was when I launched. Now he'll have to keep trying to land until I don't crash. See the issue? The third problem is if you try to fix either of these problems, you destroy space-time and end up creating multiple timelines and teleportation and a huge array of bugs. It just doesn't work out. Squad has talked about this for a while and the fact that it hasn't happened makes me think it really isn't coming. People need to stop fantasizing about this - multiplayer in KSP is never going to happen unless Squad does some serious redesigns. I mean, who knows, but for now I think it isn't coming. So please stop making posts about this. Try searching for "multiplayer" in the search bar - over 6,000 results come up. That's about 5,990 too many. It's been discussed, so now all we have to do is wait for either Squad to say it's never going to happen, or for them to say it will.
  8. I'm going to keep this simple: I dislike this idea. Career mode is hard enough already, and KSP has difficulty controls. I find it hard enough to manage part size with ships in a lower-size VAB, and even just getting to orbit with the limited resources entertains me. I don't want career mode to be the "hard" mode of KSP - I want it to be another way to play the game, one with fun things like contracts and money and reputation. It doesn't need to be harder because it's original purpose wasn't to be hard, just a more diverse playing experience where you have to manage more resources.
  9. This has been suggested before, and the answer is always the same: THERE'S A MOD FOR THAT But, of course, if you don't want to have mods then it would be nice to have them stock. But having other star systems would make the loading time ridiculous, among other lag-related things. I honestly just don't think this is possible with KSP at the moment - so mods will have to do.
  10. I've always wanted this, since I started playing KSP. Even just going to Jool can be boring because it takes several minutes. I have a mod for this, but like every gameplay-improving mod I would like it in stock KSP.
  11. Of course! Air resistance will heat up your plane. Just like @GoatRider said, the SR-71 was actually designed with this in mind.
  12. You are probably going so fast that the slightest bump will cause you to flip out of control. I tried to do this as well with a similar result. This would probably work if you were driving out on the North Pole were it is flat. But that also means you would have to fly your car over via a cargo plane, which can be annoying. Hence my post in the “Placeable launch sites” begging for this.
  13. This has already been suggested, but only by mention in the opportunity eulogy thread. I would love it if this happened. Opportunity definitely deserves some sort of easter egg, and KSP has commemorated things/people before (Armstrong statue on the Mun). We do already have a little rover cam sticking out of the ground already, but that is not specifically devoted to any one rover.
  14. To all you doubters: NOTE: Matt does not take off and get back to Kerbin with this plane... Although he does get there. So...
  15. I like that... It would be much easier for doing things when you need certain terrain. For example, I wanted to make a really fast car thing, but couldn't because the runway isn't long enough to gain any real speed. So the only place I would be able to go was one of the poles, and I didn't want to have to fly my vehicle all the way out there. However, if I was just able to slap a runway down in Antarctica, I would have a flat surface right next to the KSC. Also, if I wanted a different type of terrain, such as mountains (for climbing or driving up or whatever), then you could just be there instead of having to fly something over.