• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

91 Excellent

About Bartybum

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I don't care much for procedural tanks, because I do like the Lego system we have at the moment, but in the real world engineers can design and build a tank to whatever size they need, so it's not illogical at all.
  2. If procedural fuel tanks are a thing I'd definitely want them to have procedural 3D models for them too. The current procedural tanks mod is extremely ugly
  3. It really depends on how it'd be implemented. They could: Tilt Kerbin, but leave the orbits of the Mun and Minmus the same relative to Kerbin's ecliptic plane, or they could also rotate the Mun's and Minmus' planes to keep them the same relative to Kerbin. I was more thinking about the first one, but you're right in that the second option would only affect interplanetary transfers. In either case, I think the way Kerbin's set up now is good, and makes the game accessible enough from a learning standpoint.
  4. It provides a lot of freedom and doesn't end up bogging down the game. User-activated syncing is the way to go in my opinion.
  5. yeaaaaahhhh look no. they make games because they need money to live a life.
  6. Regarding the simulation stop button, from a QoL perspective why does this issue even exist to begin with? Why does it not just perform a single calculation the moment the Snacks GUI is opened? This is the only thing so far that's stopped me wanting to install the mod
  7. Moving aside all discussion of available developer resources and whatnot (Assuming LS is optional of course, when there are those who don't want to have to deal with it) Regarding LS on the ship scale, I'm really in favour of a simple LS system ala the Snacks! mod, where you have food, waste/fertilizer, growers and recyclers. To me it's exactly the same as needing to carry solar panels to generate electricity. The complexity really comes along when you start thinking on the scale of installations. I really like the idea of having to personally fly a resource supply line with a capable ship, then being able to automate it to fly at optimal dV windows (think porkchop plots). By endgame, having tens of installations is going to be extremely tedious if even if you only have to fly a single resupply mission per station per year, so automated colony management is key imo.
  8. I'd think that this would make sense (the huge diameters are only hypothetical, just to show the pattern): 0.625 1.25 1.875 2.5 3.75 5 7.5 10 15 20 30 From 1.25m onwards, tank diameter doubles every second tank i.e. 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, etc. It's essentially exponential growth, with one size halfway between
  9. I mean, I'd be perfectly happy with Kerbin axial tilt being toggleable
  10. I think I'd be fine with one exoplanet being found to be hollow/artificial through seismic experiments, but no more.
  11. I'm not sure it's a good idea to give Kerbin axial tilt, since for new players learning how to get into orbit is already a significant task, let alone dealing with the dV losses axial tilt introduces. I think beginning the tilt at Duna would be a good idea instead, since going there is generally the first interplanetary step. The Mun is basically at zero eccentricity to allow players to first handle the concept of orbital transfers, and Minmus then adds inclined orbits. Duna then adds eccentricity, so I'd argue it's also a good case for introducing some light axial tilt. Something like Dres, Eeloo or Moho could introduce greater tilt to spice them up.
  12. While I don't care for explicit answers (and instead much prefer suggestions which keep me imagining), I'm not sure I'm inclined to agree that it reduces the scope for inventing head-canon/lore. After all, fan fiction is quite popular in all sorts of fandoms, so clearly people find it easy to come up with their own stories/head-canon. It's very easy to ignore lore in KSP because of how physically huge the world is. Again, I really think that's taking lore to the extreme. It's like one of those small things in Star Wars that sect of the really hardcore fanbase want in-depth details about, and then it just comes off as reading like fan fiction.
  13. To be honest, while I really do want some more hints towards a precursor race, I reckon what you suggest might be a bit excessive. I quite like the idea of an ancient station orbiting around, say, some gas giant in an interstellar system, or even a wreckage of a precursor ship on a distant moon, but nothing that you can really reverse engineer into useful tech. At that point, resources need to be devoted to programming that tech, making part files, etc., and the devs have gone on record saying that they don't want to have magic technology. Once you start making interstellar aliens integral to the core game, the game begins to lose some of its special pizazz for those who want to avoid that stuff.
  14. I've seen some people have the attitude that it detracts from the experience, and that "oh, it's all up to the player to make their own lore". To that I say go live a little and stop being so boring Lore is fun when handled right and non-intrusively. I'd really like to lean more into NovaSilisko's ancient Kerbals, but nothing revealing - some small easter eggs found scattered around systems, that when researched via science experiments/samples, suggest things but never really reveal any explicit details. Things like the Dunian face, pyramid and SSTV signal, and the Val ruins were perfect. They have no effect on the game, but provide a basis for roleplaying and imagination. Anything more than small snippets would take away from the magic and mystery.