FlowerChild

Members
  • Content Count

    754
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

688 Excellent

3 Followers

About FlowerChild

  • Rank
    Flight Director

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I think he means in terms of gameplay. Both involve giving purpose to placing objects in specific orbits, even if the "story" reasons for doing so are different.
  2. Just got a 502 error trying to give this thread 1 star. I think that sums things up nicely.
  3. Wow, just found your profile.  Still can't find the BTSM thread.... >:(

  4. Consider me schooled I was under the (mistaken) impression that given docking ports result in tree connections, and given you can't set up multi-connections like that in the VAB (say with bicouplers and such), that it simply wasn't possible with KSP's current architecture. Now that I know about it, I think it would actually be really cool if that functionality were exposed through the VAB to make it a little more accessible.
  5. Hmmm...that really makes me wonder how fuel flow is handled in such cases, but thanks for clearing that up regardless
  6. Hmmm...I could be wrong as it's been awhile since I looked at the relevant classes in the game, but if I remember right, the data structures that track how parts are connected within a ship don't support the "loops" that would be created if multiple connection points were allowed. Not sure how this kind of thing would be possible without that changing, but like I said, it's been awhile since I took a look at it. Doesn't Squad normally aim for Tuesday releases to match the dev notes? I'd think it would be more likely tomorrow.
  7. I doubt that's the kind of thing that would be fixed without announcement. I think it would basically require restructuring the entire docking system to allow multiple connection points, and the way ships are handled internally to accommodate having multiple paths between parts. I really don't think that would be a simple fix, as it would potentially affect many different systems such as fuel flow.
  8. Couple of questions: -Will the modifications to the pinning system make it persistent when toggling back and forth between map and in-game views? IMO, one of the most tiresome things about the previous system was the need to reclick on the individual markers to get your numbers back after say switching to in-game view to stage or trigger an experiment, and then back to map. -Will the changes to the thermal system make it behave consistently during time accel? Right now, temperatures can easily vary by a couple of hundred degrees during reentry depending on whether you're at 1x or 4x, meaning the player is stuck at 1X during an entire reentry (which can take several minutes) if they want maximum survivability.
  9. If you're looking for cost savings, you also have to take into account how much money you could be earning with the same amount of time. I think this is the big thing that prevents mining from being a useful game feature rather than just a gimmick (and this has been true of any resource system I've looked at, including my own, not just the stock one). For any given unit of player time, you can advance your space program a lot more through other means. I realize some enjoy setting up the operation simply for its own sake, and that's totally cool. However, in terms of being a practical gameplay solution to anything other than a handful of problems (the Eve landing/return example mentioned previously being one), I feel it leaves a lot to be desired. The relationship of player-time to in-game resources is a rather sticky problem to deal with for this kind of system.
  10. On a "random things that may help" note: If you had a previous version of KSP installed, and installed 1.0X on top of it, trying with a completely clean install again may help some issues. No idea if it's related to this one, but I know there was a fair bit of wonkiness back when the 1.X versions came out that was cleared up with a fresh install. Given you've uninstalled already, it occurred to me that you might be half way to a possible solution already
  11. That doesn't mean it's your space program personally making the components. In fact, it's suggested throughout the game that they come from external manufacturers. I think the whole idea of starting with an amateur or hobbyist rocket launch facility and building up from there suits the game just fine, and doesn't need to imply any incompetence with regards to the Kerbal species as a whole, just about your particular space program when you're getting started.
  12. Yup. For those that play a lot of career, there's a noticeable big gaping hole in the building progression where the barn was obviously supposed to go. If you take a look at stuff like the launch mass limit and part count upgrades, they jump from tight to almost immediate irrelevance in no time, indicating there's a level(s) missing there. Internally, the building upgrade system even recognizes more levels than we currently have and has values defined for them. I personally don't care what they look like, I'd just really like to see that progression be more fleshed out (as it was intended to be) from a gameplay perspective.
  13. I blame Renegrade for the ongoing epidemic of Monty Python quotes. He started it.