Jump to content

shdwlrd

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,009

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by shdwlrd

  1. shdwlrd
    Consider that they were told they weren't being crazy enough with their planet designs, some could possibly show up.
  2. shdwlrd
    Well, the super OP'd reaction wheels was responsible for the stock props before BG was released. But that need really isn't there anymore. I could see reducing the overall torque they produce initially. Then let the player increase it as they see fit using a slider or something in the VAB.
  3. shdwlrd
    To study a certain region of space of course. Seriously, you would need to focus more time on one region of space to figure out which stars are not apart of the skybox. Since the beginning, Nate has alluded that the new solar systems will be hidden and you have to discover them. It would make sense you would have to find the stars that are moving compared to the static positions of the ones in the skybox. That's what my train of thought is anyway. It would also make sense for comm satellites to keep one of the dishes pointed at the surface for communications, and for survey satellites to be able to continuously image the surface too. It would also be nice to keep a station in the same relative orientation to a planet or star during its orbit.
  4. shdwlrd
    Since Nate has confirmed that you will need telescopes to find the new star systems, I think persistent rotation would be included.
  5. shdwlrd
    That would be cool, KSP on the go. But I thinking between different hardware used for the Switch compared to the Xbox and PS and going through the hoops with Nintendo, it probably won't happen. At least not right away anyways.
  6. shdwlrd
    It was mentioned in one of the first interviews with Nate. Then there are a few threads discussing the subject already.
  7. shdwlrd
    The kerbin system isn't changing, all the planets mentioned are in new solar systems. That has been confirmed and reconfirmed from the beginning.
  8. shdwlrd
    This is something that is unnecessary from a game play prospective. If you want to mimic real life, sure add it. But it doesn't add any value to the game itself.
  9. shdwlrd
    I'm not saying it isn't possible to send a probe first. I'm saying that it's impractical, but it's your time to waste if you want to do it. As I said above, it's your time to waste. You can spend all the time you want to send a ship to another star system using the lowest tier parts. I'd rather use that time to progress to the point where I can do something there, not just get a glimpse of the system. So this is one of the mods that Kottabos previewed that adds a new star system into KSP. You can try out your idea. (Pay attention to the distances in the map view.)
  10. shdwlrd
    No, you don't seem to understand the scale of the interstellar parts. Download Roverdude's FTT mod and pop the largest spherical tank into the VAB. The tanks shown on the ship in Jool's orbit are larger than that. The engine bell is at least 120 meters/393 feet in diameter when compared to the space planes on the nose of it. The truss running down the ship is by my best guesstimate is at least 5 meters/16 feet across. Those parts are huge. Also, what would be the point of sending a probe? Even with the reduced scale in KSP, it will take a very large rocket to even get it on an escape trajectory, yet alone have any hope of being able to have it captured by the other star.
  11. shdwlrd
    lol... it would be easier and cleaner to use a module manager patch for the landing gear. most stock parts can withstand reentry from Kerbins orbit without blowing up. how fast are you going? if you really need to get somewhere fast, use a sub-orbital hop. it takes a few try's to get it right, once you do, you can make it to the opposite side of Kerbin in about 15-20 mins depending of how accurate you are. (it can take about 30-40 min flying hypersonic in the atmosphere.) [1.8.x-1.10.x] Module Manager 4.1.4 (July 7th 2020) - Locked inside edition - Add-on Releases - Kerbal Space Program Forums
  12. shdwlrd
    Just use the small stock landing gear. They work fine and have good temperature limits.
  13. shdwlrd
    Smh. I can't understand why some players have to have competition or wanted destruction to have fun with a game.
  14. shdwlrd
    But let me ask you, would it make sense to allow a craft that has the height and mass of the Burj Khalifa to be able to lift off from a planet without using cheats? The that is the intention of limiting the size of crafts you can launch from the surface of Kerbin.
  15. shdwlrd
    I find it funny that you used the broken systems for D&D for an example. But since I can't think of another gaming system that isn't broken in some way or another, I'll digress. So a "sim" is just the rules for the game err, I should say world and it's up to whomever to decide what you can do and how it can be done.
  16. shdwlrd
    you're not the only one
  17. shdwlrd
    Don't forget about building subassemblies side by side too.
  18. shdwlrd
    No, it's still a bad idea. Pandaman says it the best. (See below) Plus Squad tried that with the 1.0 release, it wasn't the best decision they made.
  19. shdwlrd
    The silhouette on the wall looks like a STS stack placed over a normal rocket, or vice versa. PS, candy corn, ick...
  20. shdwlrd
    That doesn't usually end well. Few useful bug reports, furious players, and being review bombed because it's incomplete and buggy.
  21. shdwlrd
    It probably be someone from within the studio, but I would have to say either Mike Rowe or Neil deGrasse Tyson could be good candidates. (If they can afford them.)
  22. shdwlrd
    @Probro It's awesome you paid for KSP twice and supported Squad with your money. But what does that have to do with Intercept studios? (Squad made and is still supporting KSP1, Intercept is making KSP2.) The line of your argument is like yelling at Opel because you can't get a Buick just because they are both General Motors brands. Squad and Intercept are different entities even though they owned by the same parent company. You supported Squad with your purchase of KSP1 and Private Division with the purchase of collectables. The goods that you paid for have been tendered, they owe you nothing else. You got what you paid for. Yes it's disappointing that KSP2 got pushed back again, but it's nothing to get irate about in the grand scheme. I can think of better ways to use that energy.
  23. shdwlrd
    Would only make sense in multiplayer, not single player. In single player I wouldn't want to be locked into one style of play, nor do I want to be competing against an AI. I would want to accomplish my goals on my own timetable however I deem necessary. KSP is challenging enough, we don't need an AI completing goals before we even figure out what we are supposed to be doing.
  24. shdwlrd
    It could be a clear day or it's just a test scene for terrain generation to see if it works.
  25. shdwlrd
    Yes, you are entitled to your opinion. Yes, you can share your thoughts on the situation. You should also expect someone to disagree and argue your position.
×
×
  • Create New...