• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Dreamixpl

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. This. Is. The bestthingever. Dropping base components from orbit was never this fun. Huh, if I had a functioning base, this is how I would drop additional equipment, in this case that's life support capacity extension and some converters. Might extend base's life by a few months/years (?). Album: http://imgur.com/a/edyk0
  2. It's not working for 1.0.5. Can't create new saves, or load existing ones. Without the mod, saves work just fine. Through, there may be some incompatibilities: http://pastebin.com/R1a0WGqW I don't want to be that guy, but, are there any simmilar mods, that serve this purpose for 1.0.5?
  3. Not really, aiming at the middle ground never works and relying on mods is just bad. KSP still has capabilities (don't know if its right word) for being one of two. It could became casual learning game, with good tutorial, and kerbals that explain what you have done good or bad. Or KSP could became next Orbiter, but ten times better, with 1:1 earth, realistic looking rockets, and worrying if 10 spare d/v is enough for your rocket.
  4. But it looks like Squad wants their game to cover very large player base: -casual players can just fly to moon in their 30 minutes break from work, without understanding orbital mechanics, basically just let autopilot do the work, with player thinking they know how it worked -semi-hardcore players, that launch their kerosene-liquid oxygen fueled rocket beasts, with radio communication satellites onto geosynchronous orbits, with no place or time for faults, calculating d/v, etc. (thats possible with mods) But thats not going to work, either make the game designed for casual players, with autopilot and simplified "everything" or make the Space Program part of the game in KSP, with advanced mechanics like d/v readouts in VAB, advanced drag model, so flying pancakes are not possible, and reentry heat, etc. Oh, i can tell so much about you, don't ever post things like this again, playing a different game won't solve anything, and i never seen any haters on KSP forums.
  5. So Squad want KSP to be very easy, not complex, fun game? Or some players are (sorry for this) too stupid to do "complex" things like putting right parts in right places, and remembering that LFO is made out of O2 and H2? This could lead to good mechanics: "take uranium from eve, so you can research RTG's" or "finally make functional ground bases that have other purpose that to grind science".Why docking was added, many players have problem with it, it's so complex! KSP should be educational/simulator game, where orbital mechanics can be learn and never forgetted, but no, let's add autopilot and manevuer assistance. So this means we can't have any complaints, because Squad can leave us? Why you are even posting this, KSP forum can be shut down every second. But really, don't tell we should praise and be thankfull to Squad for making KSP, we all just want it to be better. I'm sure everyone who said anything about KSP in this thread want it to be better, and not have a refund or say its just bad. Everyone want KSP to be more enjoyable and to ride it the next 6,324 times, and say "KSP is so great now, but it had dark times, where it was bad".
  6. One of these: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/83305-0-25-0-RemoteTech-v1-5-1 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/67450-WIP-IVA-PLUGIN-ProbeControlRoom-1-0-beta8a-IVA-All-the-things!-new-3D-RPM-17/page11 edit: replied just after seeing brienne's edit : (
  7. The main problem for experienced players is not contracts, but no more content. I ask, how much gameplay changed in past months (two years maybe?)? Its still KSP it was, just with some new additions that doesnt really change gameplay. Challenges? Like flying to Duna without manevuer nodes. Done that, on planets update (0.18? dont remember). Like flying to mun without map view? Done that, when we havent got landing gears (0.7? 8? 9?). Like another low parts challenge, but with other body to visit? Or another challenge that requires very good pc? Or challenge thats impossible, or not fun like walk aroung Kerbin? Or basically 90% challenges like ones i mentioned, on challenge subforum? Challenges/Contracts is now what we need. We need more ways to play KSP. We need something new, like new planets were, in 0.18 (?). Now we can install new planets in mods (Krag and his planet factory). KSP development should head way, that can't be done with mods (part mods, plugins) or community (contracts, challenges), like adding procedural generated galaxy, with different random planets. This could add infinite possibilities, with mods for different ways to generate galaxies or planets. Or making KSP's 64 bit mode stable (or loading things [ex. parts] when they are needed), this could also add infinite posibilities, no memory restrictions, imagine ultra graphics, or detailed planets, with landscapes different on every corner of the map. And we have career mode, that should be added after final, final version of the game, I feel like its just wasting developement time and resources on this. And dont tell me its still alpha/beta, its bad excuse. When game is in developement for years, its not normal game developing, with stages like alpha/beta/final product, its a game thats in constant developement (cant name it, cant find a word). But thats just me. I still love KSP and Squad.
  8. If career is bad, not playing is not a solution, it is must (cant find better word).
  9. The main problem about career and science modes is they are designed for new players. When you actually learn how to do things better, and learn how to launch payloads to space efficiently (bad launches cost funds). When you are very good, or old player, you rarely waste money. Im playing KSP like you, I set my goals and even document my missions, when playing with remote tech and life support mods. I think Squad should focus on game content, not career, I played KSP even before it was costing money, so visitng Laythe is boring. I have 100 MB of additional bodies in Kerbol System, two more gas giants with muns, and my Gamedata folder is weighting 2,12 GB (playing with opengl). I just wish 64 bit KSP would be stable like 32 bit.
  10. I don't want to sound bad, but I think Squad is a little too "greedy". There is too many players, when there was only kerbin and mun, you had to know a little orbital mechanics to fly to mun, and it was challenging, you could even learn what speeds gives you orbits, so players who stayed with KSP for more than two hours, didn't leave it for years (like me). Now KSP is more like for casual players, and thats not good. You can burn straight up, and then play with manevuer nodes, and then game even tells you where point your ship to execute maneuver, and orbit. I think Squad don't want to make game more hardcore: no reentry heat, because it will be too hard for players, no mining and resources on planets, because its too comlicated, even if it does make perfect sense (i remember old resource graph/ilustration, and it was good), no more planets, because player won't remember them, you get the idea. Before, you needed to learn how to play, I never used wiki (i don't remember if there was wiki), I figured out nav ball (by spending some hours in orbit aroung mun, and watching where ship is rotating on navball and visually rotating on screen), planetary transfers (without maneuvuer nodes, by trial and errors), even docking (on first try), by myself. I don't like where KSP is going... [dobrze znasz angielski, zazroszczÄ™ ]
  11. Yeah, I didn't read it, sorry. I'm still playing my realism-modded game on 0.25, and I don't have much time, as it's close to christmas, but You get the idea.
  12. No, I aggree with Frostiken: "Squad has a reputation for developing features halfway and leaving them." My plan is totally opposite to what Squad is doing. They add half-features and leave them. When You heard about enchancing IVA or EVA last time? Or adding IVA to Science Lab? How about bad aerodynamic model? Squad always does this, example, atmospheric heat. They put it in major update, to hype players, and it doesn't do anything. Should it be just visuals? New spaceplane parts: how about updating other parts, like mk1? Why waste time on new Space center, when Squad could do biomes for something else than Kerbin and Mun. Again-plan to success: do something new for update to hype players and leave it for some time. Everyone says there will be time to balance and enchance everything, but have You heard when it will happen? Everyone also says KSP is beta/alpha. You can only say this about a game, that has date of release. KSP isn't beta, it's just updated in constant (or not) amounts of time.
  13. IMHO Squad has very bad developement plan for KSP, they want to do everything at once. Sandbox SHOULD be done first, becouse it's nothing, but true gameplay. Tweakables, UI, manev. nodes, enabling IVA and EVA, map view etc. should be first added. Then Squad could focus on "lego" parts of the game, rocket parts, ivas, engines, more planets. And at the end, Squad could make career mode, cosmetical parts, etc. This way, beta/alpha testing would be easier, dev. plan, goals, would make sense. (I always liked KSP and Squad, I played ksp when it was free, and I'm always with it.)
  14. This is so true. If career is for experienced players, they already know all things (speed for orbit, etc.). If its not, there should be good tutorial, with explaining dv, speeds, inclanations, and it definietly shouldn't be: go up until Ap on map view is high, and burn towards marker on that sphere on bottom...
  15. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/70676 someone was a lot faster than You, he even put that suggestion into his own modyfication