Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

95 Excellent

1 Follower

About Gydra54

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Now THIS is an update. Wow. I've been using KIS/KAS for a while but I never imagined something like it would get integrated into the stock game. Thanks Squad for your continued efforts on this game!
  2. I don't really get the "prebuilt" sentiment. It's not like they're giving you the entire rocket to drag and drop, they're giving you pieces that you can use however you desire and combine with whatever other parts you wish. I can say that for me, I've used plenty of the SLS parts to make things that are not remotely like an SLS, and the making history parts to make things that are not remotely like any Apollo spacecraft, for example. That said, for balance and part sizing reasons, I understand the compromise they made for the accuracy of the recreation.
  3. I wonder if anyone complaining about the navball position have tried it in KSP. I expected to agree that it should be in the middle, but after playing KSP1 with the Navball moved to the left it's actually not bad at all and I think I even prefer it. Honestly, the more I look at the new UI the more I think it actually makes a lot of sense. Not saying anyone is wrong in their preferences, but I would at least recommend trying out leftside Navball, or just waiting for KSP2 to come out and see how it is then. However, I do agree that they should 100% make the GUI customizable, as much as possible.
  4. Yeah normally not negative on these, but I have made many better Ariane V rockets with stock parts before. Decals are neat I guess. It's one of my favourite rocket designs visually IRL, so it's a shame the proportions are so off with this.
  5. Wouldn't the whole "confusing new players" thing be solved by things like, a Tutorial, notifications about fuel/engine incompatibility, easily accessible in-game info, good UI design to make sorting and picking out different fuel types much much easier, progressively unlocking different fuel types in a "career" mode... etc. Like, initially I was also opposed to the idea, but it honestly doesn't seem that complicated to implement without being confusing. So long as it's much more clear than in KSP1, I don't see the issue. There's so many ways to do that. In fact, I just came up with anothe
  6. Frankly, the fact that they have stated they will be making custom planets easier to create is already enough. RSS2 will be one of the first custom planet packs and it will be done incredibly quickly if the game actually delivers on in-built planet creation tools. Then Realism Overhaul 2 would come, and would again probably be even easier to make and put together if what the devs say about improved modding support is true. There is no point in spending dev time trying to put in an optional hardcore RSS mode that the vast majority of players wouldn't even realise exists or make use of, especial
  7. Nah, AT MOST a single early playable demo or something, but even that I don't really agree with. Let them develop the game and release it when ready. I don't care even if they have to delay to 2025, I am willing to wait for a proper game.
  8. Nate mentioned that he has an interest in procedural parts, but did not comment beyond that. That is one thing I remember, but I tuned in last minute. I'll have to rewatch the interview from the beginning.
  9. Clouds! We already knew but I'm so happy every time I see them. Also like the way the planets are styled, looks more "real" and finely detailed. Also I feel like we've heard this before(?), but Nate said release is Fiscal Year 2021, "sort of going into march" or something along those lines. Hmmm, might be stream compression as well screwing with it. But yeah I'm sure they'll improve.
  10. OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD! Love that this game is still getting support like this! The new parts of course look great, and thanks so much for the new fuel drain part!
  11. I can't be the only one that's shuddering at the concept of latching onto a skyhook at interplanetary speeds... the window for hooking on and matching velocities would be absolutely abysmal, you'd have to perfectly line up and catch it in the span of what must be just a few seconds! No taking your time to cancel velocities and approach at really small speeds, if you're not careful, that thing is gonna drift away from you real quick. And if you don't catch it... off back into interplanetary space you go! Doesn't sound impossible, but certainly a very tense situation. I wish I could simulate thi
  12. A procedural part system with preset parts in the part selection menu would be ideal IMO, if they could make them as visually appealing as what we'd get with preset parts. I don't care either way though, I'm sure a procedural parts mod will be made eventually anyway.
  13. No you didn't, don't be disingenuous. You made claims that Unity is a terrible game engine for KSP and that KSP2 will run into exactly the same performance issues, and you presented zero evidence for this other than the fact that your grandma can make a game using it (????). Obviously people are going to argue with you if you make bold claims with literally 0 evidence and a non-sequitur to back them up. If you don't want to start an argument, next time don't make confident assertions with no supporting evidence.
  14. I don't get this. If I'm reading it right, OP is suggesting player-caused failure, not random part failure, which is what most "part failure" mods do (and that should absolutely stay in the modding community, random failure outside the player's control is terrible game design (EDIT: well not for some people I guess, otherwise there wouldn't be mods for it :P) and is not realistic as it is often claimed). I see no issue with part failure induced by player error. How is it any different from, say, failing to add struts and watching your rocket consequently wobble itself to its doom?
  15. Yeah I used to be so scared of mods like FAR, thinking the realism would make it less fun. Turns out all it changed practically is my rockets actually have less drag (though slightly less stable) and doing 90 degree flips with big ships annihilates them. Like, is it really more intimidating than stock aerodynamics? I doubt newcomers would be scared off by it. If anything, watching your unstable rocket flip over and consequently disintegrate would surely make for good entertainment.
  • Create New...