Jump to content

Duck McFuddle

Members
  • Content Count

    143
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Duck McFuddle

  1. I've never thought of this before, but when I saw your post it actually does seem like a good addition to the game that would probably get good useage. I've always had issues with drag, so a safe way to test that would be incredible.
  2. I've done something like this before with cheats, it was pretty fun but my part temperature was through the roof before I even got close. Without cheats I dkbt think this is even close to possible without just a ridiculous amount of heat shields. And even if you do get close, you'll explode anyway just like with Jool. This is still a fun challenge, though, if you want to see how close you can get.
  3. I've tried a similar thing, only my problem was not having a long enough space to drive down. I would have to transport my craft down to one of Kerbin's poles and that seems like a lot of work.
  4. I made a thread similar to this one a little while back, many of the answers there still apply. You can find that old thread here.
  5. When have you totally destroyed whatever semblance of KSP you had, leading to the most impressive glitches you've ever seen? Like that one time I somehow messed up changing the gravity setting and accidentally transformed Kerbin into a black and white terrifying mess of a planet, complete with partly invisible Kerbals. Still not sure how that one happened.
  6. I'm picturing it as everything KSP1 lacks - smoother, less bugs, more planets, interstellar travel, better colonies, multiplayer - pretty much every thread from suggestions and development from the past year. From what we've seen in the trailers, it does pretty much seem like all the suggestions for KSP1 mashed into a brand new, more polished game.
  7. So it seems clear in the KSP2 trailer that colonization on a large scale will be possible - building up not only outposts but even cities over time. What is less clear is how these mechanics will work on such big projects. Will I have to slowly cart out every little piece of my colony to another star system? Because that would not only be tedious but also prevent many players from seriously making a colony without using cheats. Perhaps a portable VAB? But with a feature like that, the game would instantly become way too easy to build things with, making space stations instantaneous. Colonizing
  8. I love surface bases, so having yet another thing to make them more interesting and expansive.
  9. As we all know KSP2 is coming out soon. Judging by the trailer, it aims to be a super enhanced KSP with everything the current game lacks. However, I do have one concern - and that is of how the current KSP will be updated alongside KSP2. If KSP2 has a feature, will that feature eventually be added into KSP1? Or will KSP1 just stop being updated? I'm sure many people might not buy KSP2 simply because of cost, but does that mean that they can't enjoy updates anymore? I guess the point I'm trying to make is that if KSP1 needs a feature, but KSP2 already has that feature, does KSP1 get it as
  10. I've already made a thread about this: So yes, you have my vote. That would be awesome. But many of the problems mentioned in my thread still apply - it would be a lot of effort on Squad's part. I wouldn't count on it, but who knows? Maybe one day this actually will be implemented. I'd love to move my Kerbals around with tunnels and walkways instead of having to send them out into space and awkwardly shift them around. It would make space stations a thousand time more interesting a thousand times more interesting as well. The possibilities are endless.
  11. 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.)
  12. 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
  13. 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, s
  14. 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
  15. 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.
  16. Whoops. I didn't read through all the answers (there are seven pages after all, and I'm lazy).
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. Of course! Air resistance will heat up your plane. Just like @GoatRider said, the SR-71 was actually designed with this in mind.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. To all you doubters: NOTE: Matt does not take off and get back to Kerbin with this plane... Although he does get there. So...
×
×
  • Create New...