llamatoes

Members
  • Content Count

    392
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by llamatoes

  1. If its easy to get rid of and easy to get to, and it has some practical gameplay use, then its not a bug. Its called an accidental feature
  2. More planets. I swung 'em all sister. 0.18.4 was the last update with a planet in it. Before squad shout MUH UNITY LIMITATIONS. Find a workaround. Your responsiblity
  3. Those testers weren't very good when .21 and .22 both rocked up pretty much unplayable because of the bugs
  4. Squad put it in their game. If the game is released and it crashes when a reasonable number of mods, then it's their responsibility to fix it. When its released, and reviewer is reviewing it and it isn't working, they'll tear it a new one. Either wait for Unity 5 (which I would recommend) or begin fixing it (which i also recommend)
  5. If you are getting annoyed about the inb4lock bit, than you have pretty much missed the point of the post. I am criticizing Squad as developers. That largely exists to make any overzealous mods think before silencing any dissent in their echo chamber.
  6. I've been playing since 0.16. In that time I've seen KSP evolve from a brilliant prototype into a bit of a mess. Back then, Squad could churn out a massive update (like 0.17 or 0.18) in a third of the time, and the updates were brilliant. KSP is one of my favorite games but its pretty bad when Squad have more community mangers than developers. The latest updates have taken massively longer than the earlier ones and were pretty much dead on arrival, I appreciate that the newer updates were more complex, but at least bugfix better. And don't get me started on 64-bit version. Instead of shoving a few more buggy and broken features onto the pile and shouting "Done!" take some time out to make the current features better. As it stands what KSP needs is a few good optomization updates and making the 64 bit version playable. Leave new features (at the moment) to modders who can accomplish far more in a fraction of the time as a hobby no less, and with far more polish. before people shout "Judge the game, not the developers", the game is linked to the developers. Their practices affect the game. I love KSP, but it seems the developers don't, and I want this to change. inb4lock
  7. That is also a good game, but for different reasons.
  8. Aurora: Its a 4x game and it is described as the Dwarf Fortress of the 4x genre. It is very complex. The UI is minimal to say the least, but it is a very a deep and engaging game. Almost all equipment has to be designed. LINK: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php
  9. IMHO I feel that Britain has done very well under the EU.
  10. I find you wanting to split from the EU... Disturbing.
  11. I cannot smegging believe this is up. *Squeals* Joint station, here I come
  12. Space engineers is worth a look, its by the same people as miner wars.
  13. I prefer the new one, as it makes more sense on my my interplanetary probe to have a large 2.5 antenna, rather than a 1.25 m one.
  14. I was wondering, since the only way get 100% efficient science is to get the module back. is their some way to increase the efficiency from 20%, which is far too low for a science to payout to make not returning the craft not an option.
  15. Does this mean that the Kraken will return to snap off my engines?
  16. Oh, and if the MK.I pod has reaction wheels, why does the SAS come later?
  17. I know that Kerbin has no industry that does not directly relate to aerospace development, but there are some technologies that are essentially the same thing, but where they are on the tree is totally arbitrary, as struts are are higher than yhe structural parts. Surely if there is access to sort metalwork to make a latticework of struts, and struts are like that, but slightly easier to make. They re just long pieces of metal. if you have access the sort of facilities to make cryogenic fuel tanks, then you build a long piece of aluminum. The same with decouplers, which are similar to SRBs, and I'm sure that it is quite easy to make a decoupler.
  18. It works, but I'm unsure where it comes into career.
  19. .22 made me realize how much I miss gimbals, struts and fuel lines.
  20. Crew Report at 206,000,000,000 (or a very far distance)I wish I'd remembered my thermal vest. When close to the sun Where's the sun cream?
  21. I was set the task of proving that the earth's orbit is heliocentric in my astronomy homework, (one of the greta things about being on the register of people that are good ats science at my school and living in Greenwich, London, I can attend the Royal observatory's astronomy course through my school, free of charge). I have done the whole thing about the parallax of star, and I was tempted to write a basic description of a Hohman transfer, in order to explain. Is there anything else I should include?
  22. I'd like to see the whole of c7s planes overhauled and a new aerodynamic model, and the parts that a relevant from b9 ( wings, engines, intakes, cooling manifolds and railings ) and have them stockified
  23. I think that experienced players will breeze through the tech tree in a couple of hours. I'm still really excited for some pretext to do a new space programme, but before I can really get to work doing all the orbitally constructed spacecraft, I have to be quite high in the tree. I propose for a second tree. It should be procedural, and it offers improvements, like 5% weight reduction on tanks etc, and these have increasingly high costs, so that I still have an excuse for fitting a top of the range craft with all the SCIENCE! Parts and communications parts.
  24. Probably Jool, I've lost multiple craft Aerobraking around that monster.
  25. If your using r&d, you basically will lose your crafts, as you will need to develop new ones with the parts you have.