BowlerHatGuy3
-
Posts
184 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by BowlerHatGuy3
-
-
3 hours ago, RedderThanMisty said:
A simplified kOS in the base game? That would be sweet.
Make it as powerful as possible pls. I need my robot army!
-
On 8/1/2023 at 10:08 PM, PDCWolf said:
I got to live the forum+community server era, way before matchmaking and more modern heresy
Lol. Needing to matchmake to get into a game really killed multiplayer games for me
-
One thing I really hope is that in multiplayer you can create markets where you can buy other people’s rocket designs using resources.
With everyone being in there own multiverse timelines there’s gotta be a way for people to interact you what I mean?
-
11 hours ago, PicoSpace said:
Just limit yourself to only using drogue chutes, problem solved. Or when modding comes in, crank down the atmosphere for your own "is there atmo?" pleasure.
Only using drogue chutes is lame tbh. I just want early landings to be more intense y’know?
-
Considering Duna is a Mars analogue, I feel that the atmosphere is too thick. In the game you can get most craft down with a few parachutes and a couple of engine bursts. There was even a time that a rover I built landed safely with one inline parachute and no engines.
Meanwhile irl, landing on Mars is a hassle. Parachutes can only really slow you down to 100m/s (200mph) and the rest of the descent needs to be powered.
There’s gameplay reasons to make Duna’s atmo thinner as well. It could be kinda like a stepping stone. The first legitimately dangerous landing that the player makes in campaign mode.
-
Ksp has always had this problem where there was no real reason to use generators, as the engines on your ship have could always just power everything. It’d be nice to actually have to attach generators to your ship to keep the power up.
If they do decide to implement this a good quality of life feature would be to have a bar indicating how much power your ship needs vs the amount being produced, kinda like command and conquer.
-
It’d be nice to be able to add waypoints on planets to mark places of interest or landing spots. You could add waypoints from the map view or from satellites.
-
23 hours ago, TickleMyMary said:
EDIT... Get rid of the launcher too, it's unnecessary, intrusive and is yet another thing (among many) that is stopping me launching the game. You've sold us the game, give us months of trouble and now you want to dictate how we launch the ruddy thing! Like, just stop it and focus on making the GAME everyone is here for instead of tweaking daisies and deciding to wholly rework how you present planets a few weeks after launch.
That’s probably more on the publisher side of things. Doubt they can control that.
-
On 6/23/2023 at 10:39 AM, NaughtyMonster said:
Agreed; there should be a salt flat somewhere on Kerbin with a marked mile/kilometre/whatever to do land speed record attempts and, as Idahobo suggests, this should be a spawn option (unless part of the challenge would be to transport one's craft to the flats?).
If this were implemented might it be possible to code a speed recorder into the course? So we can have properly measured average speeds over the whole course length.
A record would only be set by (at least) two runs in opposite directions within a specific time limit (to prevent "suicide" vehicles/runs!).
I think it’d be cooler if you were to discover it by yourself. It’d add to the colony building and exploration stuff.
-
6 hours ago, Lowi_Sace said:
Is already in the game under difficult settings
It is? Well, guess I need to play the game more.
-
This post was originally made asking for more options regarding the revert feature, but most if not all of the features that I requested are already in game.
-
You can make biplanes tho? Just offset the wing and add struts to keep it in place.
-
4 hours ago, Vortygont said:
Today 0.1.3.0 patch came out. I understand that some priorities are more important, but I want bottom node so much! Without bottom node I can't use it normaly. I need to rotate craft upside down to use this heat shield like others, it makes inflatable heat shield inconvieable. Please add bottom node
I’ve noticed the dev team tends to forget put a lot of specific stuff into the game. Not being able to deploy airbrakes in VAB, inability to revert and this seem like quick fixes yet they’re not implemented.
-
4 minutes ago, Keko said:
does it actually run now
The game has actually been running pretty smoothly for a while now (at least for me).
-
The lack of this feature can make the rocket development frustrating.
-
Also more detailed explosions. Having a fire with a pillar of smoke after you crash would be a nice detail.
And shockwaves. If I crash my giant 3000 part ship I want everyone within the span of 50 km to know.
7 hours ago, OrdinaryKerman said:I think i posted an idea once for more detailed kerbal injuries, never thought of having them scream though...
Don't they already panic when the craft undergoes dramatic LOC?
I don’t think they’d be able to add kerbal injuries due to the fact that at the speeds they’ll be going, hitting anything would cause them to turn into a green mist and multiple green body parts. The devs may not want to push the rating. It would be funny to have the kerbals scream though.
-
3 hours ago, PDCWolf said:
Issue 10 (and 1) should probably clue you in on the fact wobbliness needs to disappear. It is not realistic, nor it is an abstraction of, or analogous to any realistic phenomena. It also seems the same system is responsible for wings popping off, which also seems like it is getting an improper fix since you're considering only the drag force. I hope the "falling off" ends up appropriate to acting forces on all directions.
The wobbliness is too iconic to go in my opinion. I’d rather have a slider in the settings you could adjust.
-
On 4/24/2023 at 5:10 AM, breakthesystem said:
You're building a plane that's supposed to fly on Duna, but until you arrive, there is no real way to test your assumptions. Or maybe you're building a craft to land on Moho – how do you know if your craft can land properly?
In KSP1, I would usually build the plane, cheat it to Duna, and then try the landing, then revert and iterate. In my mind, it was kind of like NASA would try out the Mars helicopter in an almost-vacuum chamber to check their assumptions.
KSP2 has this awesome training simulator mode! I'd love to use it for exactly this: try out this craft, starting from that situation. None of the results count, but it'll help develop stuff. What do you think?
A simulator could open up once you land on a body and do research on it in campaign mode. Should always be on in sandbox.
-
Remember where some parts would break into multiple pieces (solar panels, antennas) once they were destroyed? It’d be cool for KSP2 to expand on that.
Of course not every part is gonna be destructible, but it’d be nice to see landing gear, the procedural wings, and some engines be able to fall apart.
-
On 5/28/2023 at 4:41 PM, PDCWolf said:
That's the overexpanded mach diamond, encircled in the actual complete plume. This is much easier to visualize when you watch a launch.
-
Ever since we first got footage of KSP2 people have been complaining that the vacuum plumes don’t look realistic enough, and that they are expanding too much.
I disagree with this because 1: most of the photo/video evidence that is used to argue this has the rocket in the upper atmosphere, not in vacuum. And 2: there are photos and videos of rockets in a vacuum where the plumes look similar to the ones we see in KSP2.
There were some good ones posted by a fellow in the latest dev update:
And there is a video from a SpaceX fairing showing an engine plume similar to the ones we see in the game as well:
I am by no means an aerospace engineer or rocket scientist so I am open to being corrected if I’m wrong.
-
On 5/23/2023 at 10:38 AM, Pat20999 said:
The indicators to begin and start a burn are unclear if it automatically burns I wouldn’t have to worry about that if this is considered then make sure you can turn the feature on and of.
Copy and paste this for the private division launcher feedback please.
Idk about that.
One of the main things I like about ksp is that you’re the one flying the craft, not some ai. Doesn’t feel very Kerbal.
-
1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:
All of my craft are ugly. All of them. I have no choice but to make them functional, which equals ugly.
Functional doesn’t equal ugly. There’s a reason the Saturn V and ISS are more iconic than any fictional vehicle.
On 5/23/2023 at 5:27 PM, Bej Kerman said:Or just forgive and forget, because these are real people and continuing to badger them won't bring back your money.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to “forgive and forget”
Sure, ranting and doom talking isn’t gonna necessarily fix anything but I still think we should put pressure on the developers to get 1000 part vehicles at some point around 1.0.
-
On 5/14/2023 at 9:23 PM, Batrachos said:
Kerbin, Laythe and Vall should have life added in visually (scatter objects like coral reefs, kelp forests etc).
I don’t agree with the sentiment that all planets with liquid should have life (which is a large reason why I decided not to use parallax).
Our understanding of the universe right now is that life is extremely rare if not exclusive to earth, and the game should reflect that. There should be only one other planet with life in KSP2 and it shouldn’t be in the Kerbol system imo.
Suggestion: Realistic Low-g movement
in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion
Posted
No thoughts here