Jump to content

illmatic

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by illmatic

  1. Thanks for making this, as I'm a fan of both kerbal aircraft and RSS. Not a criticism just a question - this doesn't let you take off from one airport and land at another, right? Basically only your active launch site exists in the world at one time? Aside from trying to get around that by changing your active launch site mid-flight. I guess multiple concurrent sites would be more a function of something like Kerbin Side and Kerbal Konstructs, but I don't know of anything like that for RSS. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
  2. While I deeply appreciate the efforts of everyone here, it saddens me that Nathan has seemingly abandoned this considering it hasn't been updated in nearly a year. Nothing against him, I understand he got hired and has other responsibilities and no one here is owed anything. Again, I appreciate it even exists and others are willing to unofficially patch it. I'm just sad when any mod maker goes 'dark', particularly one who designed my favorite mod for one of my favorite games.
  3. I would also really appreciate this feature. Almost everything has moved on to the stock toolbar, so integrating your mod would help keep the UI a bit cleaner and uniform. I will take this opportunity to thank you for the mod, however - it has been one of the first mods I grab on a new install for some time now.
  4. Doing it through an atmosphere - now there's where it gets fun. Good of time as any to repost this video, cued up to the relevant part:
  5. Yes, reentry heat and aerodynamics could scare away new players. I suggest we go further and make it so a new player is not overwhelmed with having to consider fuel, I mean this is a game and not a simulation, right? Perhaps if someone wishes to do something extreme, such as hop to every planet in a single trip, then fuel can become a consideration. Sure, that means certain stock parts are rendered practically useless (fuel tanks, heatshields), but pointless game mechanics are preferable to the tyranny of REALISM.... *spits* While we're at it, there's that whole thing about orbital mechanics
  6. We're all just addicts, looking for a taste.
  7. If it gets loaded into RAM on every launch (limited), then that is quite bad. If it just takes up hard drive space (cheap), then it's merely poor design. - Still needs to be fixed, mind you. Just not as damning as scenario 1.
  8. yeahhhh... not sure how many people are awaiting your game reviews with bated breath there, buddy. Squad gets a 96 from PC Gamer but two angry trolls down from "K3RB4L d00d", that'll be their doom for sure. You're a diabolical villain of epic proportions, you know that? Single handily putting Squad in the poor-house because you couldn't learn to TAP one key along your prograde vector, instead of holding the "D" harder than Lorena Bobbitt with a kitchen knife.
  9. Because it is, and poor game design at that. Bonus points for this one:
  10. Death to pancake rockets and abrupt gravity turns! It's really simple: 1.) Make it aerodynamic (look at real rockets as a guide, use fairings!) 2.) Finesse your turn along the prograde, you lumbering brute. Seriously, it's ONE KEY you have to TAP (not hold). A chimp could quite literally do it. If people still can't get rockets into space, it's not that they aren't able - it's that they refuse to adapt and prefer to whine about it.
  11. Yeah, I'll throw my hat in the ring for an unpaid RSS internship. Happy to help anywhere I can.
  12. Simply removing the oxidizer leaves too much empty mass in the fuel tanks - this is a bug with the stock Squad parts. There are mods which correct this, but with stock the only fair comparison would be to use the airplane tanks which are LF only. That said, it must also be remembered that Nerva engines are heavy and designed to be used with a comparably significant mass of propellant - though again, this propellant must be housed in a liquid fuel ONLY tank, not an LFO tank with the oxidizer removed as that is currently bugged.
  13. Looks like the "MOAR BOOSTERZ" crowd is mad.
  14. Simply amazing... ::bows before Nathan:: If man can't go to Mars, at least my kerbals can.
  15. Can't wait! Thanks for all your hard work, sir.
  16. I blame myself for spoiling the game with this mod to the point that I can't take stock KSP seriously anymore. Now everyone is all hype for 1.0+ and I'm just sitting here like... what's even the point, man? *gunshot*
  17. No, Ziggy is right. There is something going on with the "Launch First Vessel" contract, as I've launched tons of missions and this contract fails to complete. That said, I'm using the Mission Controller 2 mod, so it's entirely possible the error is with that mod. Ziggy, are you using this mod as well? If not, we know the problem is not in fact related to that mod and there is something else going on.
  18. Thanks again for all your hard work, pingopete. I've actually been waiting to play 0.25 until all the realism mods (including yours) got the kinks worked out. Sometimes it's good to take a break, but I eagerly await your next release. Cheers.
  19. Okay man, enough teasing us with these amazing pictures! I'm getting ready to start a video series centered around the Real Solar System mod and would love an updated version of your mod to go along with it.
  20. Sure it is, but I'm referring to the build you're showing off in these recent posts. Even if it might not be ready for an official beta update, perhaps you could use someone to help test what you've got so far in this build. (aka: I want it and there's no harm in asking! ) P.S. These pictures you're showing us of what you're working on in the next build - Is that running within the updated 7.3 RSS?
×
×
  • Create New...