Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

About Andersenman

  • Rank
    Disgruntled Contract Grinder

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Here we are, it's 2020, 1.9.1 has been released not too long ago, I'm still getting notifications about people visiting this thread, and there's still nothing. Apart from bewing not being listed with some form or another of affiliation with Squad anymore, but that just as a curious anecdote. Squad, will there ever be any development as to making this Normalizer function more comprehensible and documented to the user, please?
  2. SQUAD uses it in the stock tech tree to mock players with its utter uselessness as a control module thanks to its horrible, completely unrealistically unshieldable drag (fairings come MUCH later) and colossal ugliness when trying to surface-attach anything but a 16. But at least it has a polished finish now, so there is that. This is why I keep with me a small mod part that essentially stuffs the Stayputnik's innards into a nose cone: Weight, cost, tech tree placement, and typos adjusted, of course.
  3. I bet you say that to all the girls bugs/quirks/shortcomings/design decisions./s Respectfully, that's nonsense and I don't believe you. I highly doubt that SQUAD (no matter whether before or since you joined) deliberately provisioned the game and/or the stock vehicles in such a way that they malfunction during regular gameplay just to teach players some passive-aggressive lesson. Coding costs money, and coded nonsense is still code. That said, why is changing tyre friction something that should be invoked in the first place? Let's ignore the fact that for some reason it must b
  4. Fun with integrals: "daily snacks" means the same as "snacks per day". Using both together multiplies them into "snacks per day, per day", or "snacks per day squared". Which is not a consumption, but an increase in consumption.
  5. Thank you, I will investigate. I shall point out again that this happens to the stock, SQUAD-provided Velociteze, and does so from about 50 m/s and upwards, and thus very much so upon typical landing speeds.
  6. Again and again and again. Every bloody landing, KSP does this screwup to planes, even stock ones like the Velociteze: How is this a thing and how do I make it not a thing, please? Thanks.
  7. For when one wishes to exclude gimbaling engines from throttling to keep authority, like the Cub or the Thud. Deferring to the thrust limiter option is impractical for all but those constructions which only consider a single engine. And yes, this is still valid, so I will revive this thread.
  8. I don't think in said four years anyone has stopped any mod from moving it there ...
  9. Another handful of updates has gone by, another handful of updates without clarification on this functionality. So once again I'd like to raise this still relevant thread from the dead and ask, Thanks. Kind regards, A.
  10. Hey there, thank you for this neat addition to user-friendliness. I wonder, would it be possible to not entirely hide but reduce opacity of the unwanted orbits instead? Thanks! Best, A.
  11. Let's please not be presuming what can or what cannot be expected to be known depending on registration date, especially for a game that is as … fluid as KSP. Thank you.
  12. I appreciate that, but that's not the point. It should work intuitively for all parts. Full-stop. And even if that fairing is one of the earlier items, it's still at tier 4, costing 90 science, and is preceded by one adapter and one nosecone.
  • Create New...