General Apocalypse

Members
  • Content Count

    92
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

1 Follower

About General Apocalypse

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Due to how the requirements are coded in that's not technically feasible right now. I would require a whole different mod. Maybe one day I'll do that but for an advanced player it only takes about an hour trough blast trough the initial missions.
  2. God I hope not - I've seen 100001 games ruined by edgy attempts to be funny to get more sales from the kids. When it comes to writing KSP didn't even bothered to have unique descriptions of science experiments for each biome . There are so many generic copy/paste it's just sad. It is good to hear that some of the original developers have returned. Good luck to the development team.
  3. Love this mod but I've grown very fond of TweakScale , I've seen that they nullify each other. How much of a technical challenge would it be to make them compatible ? Are we talking long boring hours of line by line bashing or do you need to implement some clever logic to make them get along ? I'd love to see them get along.
  4. That mission is supposed to be fully unmanned. You need to send a robotic vehicle into orbit then return it. The description is wrong. Quick note : I can't update the mod to 1.9 until Contract Configurator and SCANsat are also updated to 1.9
  5. There might be a reduction (~25%) of rewards in the future - the number of missions will likely stay the same though. The idea is not to make it too hard for people when it comes to using funds. The Explorer program is a veritable cash cow by design since I want people to have the liberty to fail without cursing their life.
  6. It's gotten to the point we can agree to disagree. For me there's no alternative to KSP it's a one of a kind game . I've been building rockets since I was 8 , KSP is the only way I can scratch that itch without paying a small fortune and using time I don't have. We do not know the size of the development team or the resources. As for the success of KSP the sales numbers are bad because the game started as a pet project and had the most horrible management possible. Even so it is a game that fell in line with the ascent of SpaceX and it developed a friendly and loyal fan base. As for the flying part - well love a good flying simulator and KSP is very very far away from that. It never had a chance given the size of the development team to be a one. You should tryout MJ , it needs the rocket to be made for it otherwise it will fail in the most ridiculous ways possible. There's nothing to fear about it.
  7. Hopefully holiday season 2020 but it could stretch to 2021.
  8. I would prefer to have something like a crisis ie. solar flare , gamma ray burst , reliability issues that could be mitigated progressively as your technology advances.
  9. Absolutely yes . A biannual release of a DLC is a fantastic way to keep the revenue required to fund the development team and keep the community interested. Even if they just grab a bunch of popular mods and integrate them I would be extremely happy with that. Plus the game designer can ink out a daring plan without worrying to much about technical details.
  10. To each their own , who says we can't have mixture of both ? The problem with MJ is that you can't open it's insides in game and play with it. KSP 2 could fix that. Moders come and go , there are tons of great mods that got left in the dust when their creator vanished off the KSP scene. The time and budget is irrelevant to us. It is a managerial decision . Why should we , the community worry about this ? We pay for the product , given the humongous popularity of KSP they can easily produce a AAA game. Also I own the company , we're quite small though , just 12 people.
  11. Historically even Vostok -1 was automated , reaction times of humans are insufficient during certain maneuvers hence we take our best guess , crunch the numbers , input them and let the computer handle it. I personally hate doing rendezvous more then a couple of times per station , how much fun can there be in the 25th liquid fuel resupply light ?
  12. MJ doesn't require additional testing since it's just an input system. TweakScale has some hurdles but nothing major since it's a linear scaling of basic parts , it's an algorithm Darn it. Also MJ was made by a OG dev AFAIK. If a muggle moder can maintain these mods without giving up on life a coder that's familiar with the program architecture will cruise trough the testing. Games always have choices , it's what makes them fun. EDIT : BTW I've been coding since 1998 , started with Pascal . Let's not throw expertise around nonconstructively .
  13. In regards to MJ and TweakScale - they are wonderful mods that give you the option to play the game in certain ways. Just like the impact of G-forces they can be made into an OPTION. I personally use MJ because after a few launches fuel resupply flights become a snooze and because it has a built in planner for interplanetary transfers. Manual corrections are often needed . As for TweakScale it's the best thing since sliced bread because the base game lacks far to many options. The fight over "IRL you can't make things bigger" is quite embarrassing TBH . Imagine the progress in aerospace engineering and materials science we would have if we were only able to do things that in KSP are basic like landing people on another planet.