Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PDCWolf

  1. I don't, but you might think I'm one when I ask if you have a job, especially one where you have to summarize your work day to justify it to other people.

    I work 10 hour days. 9.5 of those hours are handling grueling, inane, obscure, undocumented problems on tight time schedules based on reports that are frequently incomplete or simply wrong. I love those 9.5 hours. They invigorate me. The last 30 minutes of my day I spend summarizing what I did, and usually by the time I'm done I want to put a bullet in my head.

    Then how comes the guys over at rust can summarize it so well? Even the under-the-hood-that-no-one-notices stuff ?

  2. Yes, because surely you can deduce all work a person has done that week by what he/she wishes to share or not. :rolleyes:

    Well, you can certainly compare it to the updates themselves, and for me the math works (no work in weeks = lousy and empty updates). Most tangible work comes from people not even mentioned in the updates (mod devs hired at the last minute)

  3. I prefer the old format, you can pick what you want to read and you get to see who is really working and who's slacking (an entire week to say you can't talk about X? To rig bones to a mesh?). This new format seems perfect to hide that kind of stuff behind a single big wall of text, and I wasn't interested in even reading beyond the first paragraph. If I have to quote someone that does it right, it would be the guys over at Rust. Just look at that huge amount of content with pictures and videos and explanations and stuff, and it comes out weekly too.

    Squad listens more than most game companies

    AHAHAHA yeah sure.

  4. The barn was horrible, both in design and quality. It was a good idea to remove it back then. Even though the replacements are much better in quality, they still lack a lot and are still horrible, with lots of easily visible mistakes on them.

  5. k

    If you feel like adjusting various angles by a single degree is fun then go ahead, but it is definitely not easier.

    Stop adding more myths to FAR, create planes that look like planes, balance them right, and they'd mostly fly. Recreate a cessna, recreate the oblique-wing nasa prototype, recreate a box with correctly placed wings and it'll fly. Even a cylinder with no wings will fly if piloted correctly and if given enough speed.

    You do not need to adjust stuff degree by degree nor do you even need to look at the graphics.

    Here, have another thread proving you wrong, I'll even give you the pleasure to throw any logical fallacy you can think of at this thread because you'll only end up making a fool of yourself.


  6. En las ultimas actualizaciones se agregaron cosas como un modelo aerodinámico correcto y calientamiento atmosférico por reentrada (o simplemente ir muy rápido). Para poder enviar cohetes al espacio ahora hay que hacer un "gravity turn" hecho y derecho, y para reentrar hace falta una trayectoria correcta o escudos térmicos.

  7. "How do you deal with interplanetary aerocaptures"

    I don't. I use gravity assists or burns. The biggest problems are moon-less bodies or very small bodies, which obviously require bigger efforts. I sent an Ion based satellite to the Sarnus (OPM) system and visited all moons with about 2000 m/s dV or less, contrary to the 17km/s dV that the calculator gave me for my braking burn alone.

  8. They are, as developers, facing the consequences of procrastination and a very bad development cycle. They now have to face (post-release) all the problems they were postponing, all those placeholders they left in the game for later. And the players are facing the consequences they -probably- deserve for not calling squad out on their mistakes on time and being hopeful they would fix stuff in time just because they threw money at them. Welcome to the world. Hey, at least they are fixing it now, too bad you spent all those years designing stuff in a placeholder when you knew it actually was a placeholder, or was it you didn't pay attention to the multiple times they said so?

    protip: they are now trying to "hotfix" everything they left undone (aero, reentry heat, sounds, the messy UI, etc).

  9. Building replicas of real spacecrafts feels its like copying and restrain you to realistic crafts instead of using your mind to build your own ships. So do anyone has this feeling and is replicas of spacecrafts better in performance than your own rockets.:P

    "Using mechjeb feels like it's using a cheat and restrains you to building crafts instead of using your skills to pilot your own ships. So does anyone have this feeling and is the autopilot better than your own piloting skills"

    Please don't do this.

  10. Very good mod, I'm giving you some rep and 5 stars, we do need more mods like these.

    I suck at coding more than anyone, but one of the resource mods (OKS was it?) has this kind of resource consumption for active/proto vessels. Specifically there was a small logistic module that simulated a supply run from A to B automatically (it pretty much teleported) and used the resources in it to do so, I'd look there.

  11. @ PDCWolf: You miss the point. KSP is NOT our universe. It's a toy-sized thing with all 4 of the fundamental forces radically different than what we know. NOTHING we're familiar with, right down to the very elements on our periodic table, can exist in the KSP universe. Period, end of story. Thinking "realism" = "just like on Earth" is fundamentally flawed.

    Hey now, I'm not the one trying to make stuff works like it does on earth (gravity, atmosphere, etc), I'm just saying that that's what squad is trying to do, so expect it to work as it does.

  12. For people that base difficulty around one-pass interplanetary aerocaptures:


    You are complaining that something proposed multiple times but shrugged off due to difficulty is not possible in the game. Basing difficulty around something that should be near impossible is something rather dumb to do.

    Reentry heat is useless at its actual -non existant- difficulty, even when bumped to 120%. It's your fault, you want to slow down from 11km/s to 2km/s in a single pass with a 100 ton ship.

  13. I hope we are getting dev note wednesdays or any other equivalent this week. This certainly isn't a dev note. And you better don't go calling 1.0.3 a hotfix, something supposed to fix the game isn't delayed months.

    Just a reminder than a 16 years old called nelson sexton has a better dev cycle than an indie team.

  14. So, you are suggesting getting the behavior back to something you yourself imply is unintuitive and unrealistic just for gameplay convenience?. I'm against.

    Those configurations are working "as expected", and that's better for new players, like a dart going nose first which is expected, but you suggest a dart being able to fly tail first "for gameplay convenience".

    Those landers have a lot of design issues too, and you don't even need a lander for Kerbin either but I guess you want to keep some funds for recovery, in which case that's a challenge you should face: "I want to bring a lot of rocket back, it's aerodynamic properties are bad and make for a dangerous reentry and landing process" "I know, better change the drag system to accomodate for my mistakes instead of facing a challenge".

  15. Please let's not criticize wobble, remember it's there to be fun and Kerbal. Now, as a matter of fact, wobble is fixable (so are many other issues), fully, but it has been said by squad many times that they want to keep it for the supposed challenge, fun and kerbalness it gives.

    Just download Kerbal Joint Reinforcement and, to help your many mod issues, just pretend it's one of those "stock fixes" (it actually is).

  16. I always play stock only in fresh installs until my BS meter reaches a high level, then I install mods mostly to add variety to the game and stuff that I think the game needs. Most of the time I also do my own fixes (like with the -outdated- mod in my signature).

    TL;DR The normal game feels empty and too simple/easy to me, even with the gimping limitations it has.

  17. •Radiators

    •3.75m station parts (like the hitchhiker but that doesn't look like the inside of a passenger plane)

    •3.75m spaceship based cockpit (think a more IXS based, centered, front facing cockpit. Like what the cupola is now.)

    •MK3 drone part

    •1.25m Cupola, without the control panel in the middle of the view

    •Smaller and less OP airbrakes

    •5-way rcs

    •Tweakables for existing tanks to hold whatever I want them to hold

    •Propellers, turboprops, turbofans

    •Pontoons for hydro-whatevers

    •Smaller and bigger electricity related parts

    •Struts you can place while on EVA

    •More landing leg variations (aerodynamic ones too)

    •More engines, less homogenized, more specialized

    •1.875m parts

    •More probe shapes and sizes

    •Cylindrical cargo bays (for rockets instead of planes)

    •More nosecone variation (or a procedural one based on the fairing technology)

    •0.625m solid boosters and plane related parts

    •Something to extend the amount of fuel a SRB has (talked about long ago)

    •More antennas even if they are just visual

    •3.75m docking ports

    •Cargo ramps



    All doable, most already done too. None of them seem to go outside the scope of the game except for the non-jet-related plane parts. INB4 HURR DURR PART CLUTTER/RAM, give us a working x64 version for that

  18. Well, most smartphones don't get dust inside them, do they? They're mostly sealed shut, and, on occasion (such as some waterproof phones), solid all the way through. Of course, they do this at the expense of a) not being very modular or customizable (although this could change) and B) using the less-powerful ARM chip architecture.

    Soon, maybe advances in solid-state cooling methods, such as Peltier coolers, could allow computers with x86 chips to be built like smartphones, with no air gaps inside in which dust can collect. To some extent, liquid cooling could certainly help with this as well. Alternatively, someone might start marketing ARM laptops which trade some performance for long-term reliability and super-slim form factors - that's essentially what Microsoft has done with its Surface devices, but those are still rather ungainly for certain tasks that normal laptops are good at just because of how small and tabletey they are.

    With a friend we own a repair shop (we do pcs, smartphones, peripherals, tablets, laptops, etc) and believe me, most DO get dust inside of them. We haven't gotten any waterproof device yet, not even splashproof so I can't tell you about those, but dust gets everywhere.

  • Create New...