Jump to content

Azimech

Members
  • Posts

    5,445
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Azimech

  1. I'll continue with creating stuff like helicopters, cars etc. Because I've discovered space is amazingly boring. At least in KSP1. The editor is the major selling point of KSP1. The whole space stuff ... nah. KSP2 devs: think of another product parallel to this one. Look at how Automation is connected with Beam NG: Drive. I'll be using multiplayer to race cars, helicopters and airplanes with the people who want to. https://gfycat.com/kindsadbufeo-helicopter-chopper-kerbal-space-program https://gfycat.com/skinnyknobbyhart
  2. Jet engine smoke. Unless above 7.5 clicks.
  3. Can't see the video over here. Do you have another link?
  4. If I proposed a hardcore simulation, I would go far beyond that. I've been playing using this game since version 0.16, 2012. This game has never been for anyone. And the complexity has been added over the years. In some ways it already is a mechanical maintenance game. Why need an engineer of a certain level to repair a wheel or solar panel? Getting that engineer to that level is already micromanagement - the tedious type. And that wasn't my idea. By the way, for intelligent games like this one, increasing complexity over the years seems to be a standard in this industry. KSPIE/RO are vastly more complicated than what I propose. Let's agree to disagree.
  5. What I've never understood in KSP is why control surfaces and landing gear don't draw power. Either stamina from the kerbal when using mechanical linkages and direct control or hydraulic/electric. In real life you get the stiffening of controls at high speeds and a lot of pilots died because they couldn't get out of a dive. I'd prefer if both hydraulic and electric can be added, with a loss of pressure and hydraulic fluid when damage occurs. A fluid storage container, pump driven by APU or engine. Multiple pumps needed when the amount of control surfaces/landing gear goes over the pressure/flow limit of the pump.
  6. I don't like rovers. I like cars. All stock. Just painted. My own car: Citroën BX 1985. Older unpainted Dodge Charger R/T 1969, stock. And some of these were made into capable of driving on other worlds. https://gfycat.com/uncomfortablemadeuparrowworm
  7. Excellent thinking! Thanks for the effort!
  8. Thank you! It really makes the whole experience of a fly-by more real. I made this short video almost 6 years ago. The sirens are my own mod. I think I still have that version of Camera Tools on my HD. Could take a while to find it. In case you need it, let me know.
  9. Nice! I remember making the very first edits in the configuration files of BDArmory to create the first prototype. I see all of the guns I created are still there. We tested it in combat and we liked it. Then I gave development away. Maybe, if I'll ever find the time, I'll compete again with dogfights. Maybe in KSP 2?
  10. Nice. Is the doppler effect working again?
  11. I agree. Imagine a planet where cloud cover is such that you can't use solar panels. At least you could build a wind turbine, which is a challenge in itself to maintain and control. Also ... sail a ship to conserve energy on Laythe. And let's face it ... flying an airplane above Kerbin is way too easy. Easy for me to say having used flight sims since 1983. So that's why it should be optional.
  12. I'm here, just checking every once in a while. Not active with the game atm. Waiting for KSP2.
  13. Well, I apologize. I've been inactive for a number of years now. The 1.4 update really threw me off and since then I've felt the game has been going in a direction I don't like. I've lost my confidence in the original KSP developers. And I certainly do not like hanging on to relics of, in my opinion, bad design decisions. But I could've written it in a less snarky way.
  14. Might as well let go of the whole endeavor of improving the effects of the rocket engines. Why improve graphics anyway? Let's go back to 2012. The graphics were good enough.
  15. I like the KAL-1000. But I must admit, I've never used it before. The thing always felt as "unfinished". Almost 5 years ago I needed some way of having an ignition system for my piston engines. I did it using scripts, using libraries to create sensors, transistors, and capacitors. It worked but I halted development. While piston engines are not the scope of KSP, hear me out. IMHO the problem with the KAL-1000 is that it can't use sensors like the angle of a robotic arm, the distance to a different part, energy levels, temperatures, the distance to the ground, the angle of a surface, difference in the amount of light etc. All RL robots use sensors, all we have is a timing based system. Coils and magnets: wouldn't it be nice to be able to build generators and motors? Could be simplified like the thermal system. Just omit some factors. Could be as easy as using an electric motor supplying energy when being driven, like a lot of them do in real life. This shouldn't be part of the base game to raise difficulty. Don't want to use it? No problem, you can "complete" the game. Thoughts?
  16. Thanks guys, looking wonderful. Can I make a plea for not having jet engine smoke at low altitudes? It has always bothered me in KSP. It's unrealistic and ugly. The only times you get jet engine contrails at low altitude is due to specific atmospheric conditions or if there's a problem with the engine.
  17. Well, it seems I have finally a use for my sails :-)
  18. Great job! I haven't been around for a while ... how do you import blueprints in the SPH?
  19. I have a stock SSTO helicopter. Could be modified to just use a scientist instead of a pilot. But you need an additional stage to launch it from Kerbin and get it to Laythe and back. If you're running career mode some parts might me above your tech tree.
  20. Strange nobody took an effort to compliment on your work. Maybe the community is on a decline? I must admit though, first time in many months that I'm actually here.
×
×
  • Create New...