Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

118 Excellent

About asmi

  • Rank
    Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. You obviously don't have any knowledge to speak of on this matter. As an (ex-)modder myself I'm familiar with the way many mods work, and almost all of them had their developers reverse-engineer parts of KSP over the course of development of said mods. Now, it was mostly done to either work around some stock bugs/limitations or just to figure out how exactly things work (as we have NO documentation worthy of mentioning whatsoever), which is why Squad turned a blind eye to that by adopting a policy of "don't tell, don't ask" (which is why a lot of regular players are completely unaware of this)
  2. @sal_vager There are fewer and fewer of the "old band" so to speak here. I wish you well and hope you will come back!
  3. There is one feature which was (is) implemented in a mod...well...sorta kinda. I'm referring to robotics and moving parts specifically (like arms, deployable "wings" with antennae/solar arrays, various scientific instruments, etc.). If Squad would implement it so that every robotic action won't spontaneously blow up ship with about 30% chance - I'd be very pleased.
  4. There was a study done by ESA at some point, and GSE has been designed such that it would not preclude such upgrades in the future. I seem to recall that GSE was not the only issue - processing facilities would need to be expanded to support Progress/Soyuz campaigns (loading propellants/gases, pre-launch testing, crew quarters/training facilities and so on). Also the Soyuz capsule itself would need to be modified so that it would be more buoyant as in case of launch abort it would land into the ocean.
  5. Why it is silly? Do you always feel like you HAVE TO continue playing game you don't like (or burned out of) just because someone claimed that it's "playable"?
  6. I think this will actually be pretty substantial change as graphics updates usually require at least tweaking of visual assets too. As for localisation - as a native Russian speaker, I totally support that functionality. There is a lot of russian-speaking space fans, and for a lot of them language is an issue. For me it's not a big deal as I speak English fairly well, but I can absolutely see how it might be a big deal for some. Try using kOS and you'll be mostly watching videos of launches (with occasional "oh shi.!" moments when you mess something up in the script, or when you g
  7. Well I can think of at least one thing - KSP is loooong time overdue for graphics overhaul. Current version is not 2017-year as far as graphics s concerned, and more like 2010-ish. Average gaming computer is not a calculator anymore, you know, and can handle quite a bit more. That would be number 2 on my list - current career is just borderline unplayable, and it's always been that way. Here I have to confess - I've never actually had enough patience to complete stock career (as in - unlock all R&D tree and reach all milestones). I enjoyed RP-0 career much more, and would be
  8. If you think that these are some kind of out-of-ordinary circumstances, than you are wrong - it's a day job for many of my colleagues. I deal with that every day. And my computational resources sometimes are even more limited (think microcontrollers which can't perform several billions of operations per second like even very old desktop computer easily can). The thing that every competent project manager knows is that you don't include things into roadmap unless you're reasonably sure you can deliver them on time and on budget. So such cancellations are always project manager's
  9. As a software developer myself, I can tell that these kinds of things tend to happen when there is no planning nor roadmap, because when they exist (even if just internal to the team) it's already known in advance which features would be implemented and approximately when. Presence (and accuracy) of such plans is what differentiates professional software development process from amateur-hobby-like "today I want to work on feature "A" 'cause it's cool!, but tomorrow I might change my mind". Everyone who has been following KSP development as long as I have (since 0.17) have seen many-many times
  10. You can do it with MJ + RO. It handles asymmetric thrust pretty well in most cases.
  11. I've learned the game in zero time as I was space enthusiast before that and so knew all math behind spaceflight. And there was no career mode at the time. Oh - and no docking either (I've started in 0.17). So there was nothing to learn really except to slap things together and see them explode (if you think in 1.x craft are wobbly, I wonder what you'd say about 0.17/0.18 ) Lastly, my total playtime in KSP is significantly over 1k hours. And there are quite a bit of people like me. 0.1% maybe is a bit of overstatement, but surely devs count on players spending 100's of hours in-game, so
  12. Also on the subject of "Career as tutorial" - this game is a sandbox which implies replayability is the name of the game (many of us here play it an-and-off for several years already!), so average KSP player is noob only for 0.1% of total game time at best. If career is indeed intended to be just a tutorial for new players (I don't believe it is, but some here do seem to think that way), they've invested one heck of development resources into feature most players don't need after their first few hours at most. Bottom line - KSP needs a real career mode if existing one is a tutorial.
  13. It's not that I disagree in general, but sometimes it does help with spacecraft design. For example check out Soviet Venera series of probes - first landers in series didn't even reach surface because there was no information about the kind of conditions they will encounter, and their "best guesses" (quite pessimistic at the time - they were built to withstand pressure up to 2.5 MPa - about 25 times normal atmospheric pressure) turned out to be totally wrong, and so subsequent probes were massively overbuilt to withstand ridiculous pressure only so they would be able to tell the story so to sp
  • Create New...