Jump to content

Jimmidii

Members
  • Posts

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jimmidii

  1. Every time I see on the news about anything we are doing in space, my mind immediately drifts to recreating it in KSP, and then, for the real mission, the manoeuvres that have happened, and the manoeuvres that it'll be doing next.
  2. They'll be able to reduce launch costs by just having a Scotsman chuck the rocket into orbit like a caber. Scotland would be an interesting choice, but I do wonder if the weather would give reliable enough launch windows.
  3. For me personally... No mods. No reverts. Permadeath. Comms network required for control. Extra groundstations off. Signal occlusion at 1.0 for non-atmosphere planets and 0.98 planets with atmosphere. Plasma blackout on. Kerbal g-force limits turned on. (1.0 tolerance) If a tourist dies, it would be the end of that particular save and I'd start again. (Although in practice it means I rarely take tourist missions. When I do they're completely nerve-wracking, and I've managed to avoid losing a save to this so far...) Kerbals level up immediately. I avoid clipping functional parts (fuel, control etc.) but don't mind clipping structural parts. I try and avoid leaving any debris in orbit and try to design anything that's not meant to stay in space as crasher stages. (Mistakes do happen here) I love the challenge this gives, and think of this as my 'official' save, but I do have others without restrictions for testing and goofing around.
  4. Laythe is an awesome target for missions if you're looking for something bigger to do. My current long term aim is to get a large exploration ship onto the ocean there, which can be refuelled from on deck, along with the infrastructure on some of the islands to mine and refine fuel, and transport it to the exploration ship.
  5. There are mods that replace the skybox used. One of them might give the effect you're after.
  6. It's probably because rockets now drain fuel evenly from all fuel tanks in the same stage by default. Used to be that they'd drain from the top ones first and gradually become bottom heavy, so in atmosphere they were like throwing a dart backwards. Once you'd gotten high enough the atmosphere would be negligible and SAS could control the rocket like it was in space, and point it in the right direction again.
  7. I've had more than a few launches that have had a few flips on the way up.
  8. That is an awesome vid Still actually get goosebumps watching that one. This is another one that newer players might not have seen, from the awesome KurtJMac. The mechanics might have changed a bit, but it still stands out as an awesome combination of skill and luck. Back then KSP wasn't particularly common on YouTube so events like this just had not been seen before.
  9. That 'Local' text there under the widgets, click on it to change to absolute, and make sure angle snap is turned on too.
  10. My orbital insertion stage usually has a tiny bit of fuel left over after pushing the payload into orbit. I have four of the smallest radial engines attached upside down near the top of the stage, and a couple of sepratrons upside down and angled to give rotational stability. Once I get into orbit I disable the main engine, enable the four retrograde engines, line myself up prograde, hit full throttle, and stage the separation and the sepratrons. Deorbits the stage, doesn't need to be controlled, and I don't need to spend any fuel from the upper stage to finish the orbit.
  11. Has to be Jool surely? If they worship the Kraken, let them find it. (Survival of penal colony not guaranteed.) That reminds me, I still need to try the new personal parachute on Jool...
  12. You could use cubic struts or radial attachment points symmetrically, and then attach them that way. Extra parts, so not ideal, but it should work.
  13. Dammit! I didn't even know I wanted that in stock until you said it!
  14. There are an almost infinite number of answers to that question, and you're asking KSP players... If you want more specific answers, we'll need a bit more information. Are you playing career or sandbox? Do you have Making History or any mods? What sort of KSP experience do you already have? In more general terms, best bet is probably to build some sort of interplanetary tug with a docking port on it that can push a rescue craft out to Duna and back, and a lander that can go down to Duna and bring them back up to the tug. You've got to Duna at least once, so now you need to go there again, but with enough stuff to get back It's also worth watching some Youtube videos, a search for 'Duna Rescue Mission' should bring up some stuff that'll point you in the right direction.
  15. One argument against including a delta-v readout seems to be that trial-and-error is the intended way to play the game. However, some of the game options, including the default hard settings, turn off reverting and turn on permadeath. Both of these stop trial-and-error being an option. Due to this, while the game still gives you (just) enough numbers to calculate what you need to, I don't see trial-and-error as a valid reason to not include delta-v.
  16. The only way I can see any sort of multiplayer working is using a Spore or Dark Souls style. Content from other players can be dragged in to populate your game, perhaps craft that are in place due to successful contracts, etc. Easily could be explained as being from rival space agencies. Difficulty settings could define how far and fast these rival agencies expand, giving some aspect of a space race to the game. Completely sidesteps the griefing/time warp/latency questions.
  17. It's a bit late for this now, especially for the players that have been around for a long time, but if we'd have known what KSP would become, science experiments could have been used to fill out the information panels on planets, eventually leading to research in the R&D dept. telling you what the (minimum) required delta v for transfer, takeoff etc. would be. Once upgraded it could tell you what the delta v of craft you've built is, and a part could have been used to get in flight delta v. I calculate delta v myself by hand (or a rough figure that's probably good enough in my head), and I don't mind doing that, but having it in game would be nice.
  18. Honestly, the mission creator is the biggest part of this DLC. You don't need to use it yourself to get the benefit of it, as it also allows you to play other people's creations. Squad know their player-base. They haven't tried to create a series of missions that will be over in a few hours, it looks like they've given a really powerful tool to the player base to create their own. I'm fully expecting massive campaigns to come out of this, as well as short fun missions... basically all the content we could ever want, objectives-wise. I can't wait to see what people come up with.
  19. 4 October 2011 I bought the game, played the demo a few days before that. After hearing about it from my gaming guild on IRC back then, I actually had trouble finding the game later, as 'ksp' didn't return anything even remotely related to the game on Google back then Fair to say it's been good value for me...
  20. Oh this is upsetting Humanity as a whole isn't as smart today as it was yesterday. R.I.P
  21. Those engine plates and interstage fairings... Ooh, assuming we're not restricted to attaching engines to engine plates.... Ok I've got a few ideas Can't wait!
  22. What do you mean 'used to'? Parachutes only work if there's air out there! That said, I can understand why they've done it from a gameplay balance perspective, but it really doesn't seem logical that a Kerbal can only learn how to use a parachute by leaving Kerbin's sphere of influence.
  23. Don't get me wrong, the new structural parts look like they will be awesomely useful, but are we still limited to having a rigid attachment to one parent node? Still possible to build up structures with them if it is still just the one attached node of course, but I'd love to see nodes able to be treated in a similar way to docking ports, with more than one attached and one acting as the real node for the purpose of the craft.
  24. Depends entirely on you. It's a different playstyle, you need to plan ahead to make sure rockets are ready for transfer windows, and because the cost of failure is greater, especially with life support mods installed, you need more reliable rockets and mission plans, with redundancy and contingency in place (Or really good life insurance and speeches). Personally, it's not for me, but If that sounds like something you'd enjoy dealing with and overcoming, go ahead!
  25. Ok, technically yesterday, but I was lucky enough to attend a talk by Chris Hadfield, which was awesome Hearing him talk about his experience with space and everything he'd done to get there was inspiring, and he's also got an awesome ability to take any questions and run with them. I highly recommend attending one if you ever get the chance.
×
×
  • Create New...