Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by b0ss

  1. Will this ever get support for something like a system where modded parts like reactors, nuclear engines, radioactive fuel tanks etc. pose a radiation hazard to the Kerbals? Would be a nice touch of realism to have to account for the extra mass of shielding your command pods in order to not microwave your crew with the on-board fission reactor. Perhaps even a backwards option to only shield the part if you're going to be taking it to an environment you don't want to irradiate.
  2. Hi all, sorry if this has already been asked but I'm not sure what to search to see if it was. Is there a way to change all the phase angles of all the celestial bodies to be correct for a given date? i.e. if I wanted Neptune to be in the same place it was on June 12, 1463, or if I want Mars to be where it will be on November 17, 2132, the whole system would change accordingly to fit the scenario
  3. Do the cameras consume electricity while in use in "first person" or via monitors?
  4. So far it looks like they've been pretty respectful of what KSP has made of itself on its own. ...i take back what i said about Making History now >.>
  5. Squad hasn't had much problem hiking up the price of the game in the past for reasons like this. Most games made with this quality and effort cost around $60. Maybe they can take up a small sponsorship or something. Like I said I don't know anything about marketing. Not necessarily. It usually comes as a given that when someone asks a question about the game they are playing full stock. If Squad releases console exclusives, pre-orders bonuses, etc. then hundreds of players will become unable to help each other or communicate fully about the game. I agree with all of that. However my concern is mainly about what Making History will do to the community, and not so much the game. All extremely well said. As were my suspicions, much of what I wrote is out of my own characteristic paranoia about big businesses. The word "DLC" makes me very nervous, especially if it's touching a project I love. DLC used to be just some french fries that you could order with your burger if you wanted, but nowadays DLC determines what kind of burger you are going to get in the first place based on what you can afford and what system you use, and sometimes even just luck. I would feel pretty rotten if something like that poisoned such a revolution in sandbox games as KSP. I disagree with the first part... there are quite a few mods that enhance KSP's visual factor, add interesting functionality, fix grossly unrealistic behavior with, say, parachutes, etc. Perhaps it won't be as good and would eventually stagnate, but I'm a little confident that development of KSP could be potentially handled solely by the modding community, if only for some time before the original software begins to age poorly. You're right about everything else though... Exactly my point! Thank you, sorry for the trouble. Wasn't aware of this thread at first. My understanding is that everything shown in the DLC is completely separate from 1.4
  6. Hey friends... Looks like the new DLC Squad and Take Two have been working on is nearly upon us. I have a few strong feelings about this, so I thought I'd write them down in a post here to clear my system, and maybe even initiate some discussion in the replies below if I don't embarrass myself with a miscommunication Just a couple disclaimers first, I'm not here to bad-mouth anyone who is looking forward to purchasing the DLC. Your game, your choice Second, I'm not here to accuse Squad or Take Two of anything or to unfairly criticize them, I feel like they've worked hard on this and have outdone themselves both with features and visuals once again. And third, this is just for me to put my thoughts down. I'm not asking for any trouble or trying to give some to anybody. So- onto the topic at hand. I was initially wary about the whole idea of there even being separately purchased DLC for reasons that become obvious when looking at some "Tripe-A" titles of the last decade. We all know that Squad is a good team though, and even if I had a few reservations about a third party acquiring KSP at first, I've come to accept Take Two as very trustworthy with this awesome project kept afloat by such a lively and friendly community. Now, I'm not big on marketing or software design, so if the rest of this sounds like I'm pulling words out of a hat it's likely because I am. Call me paranoid or pessimistic, but Kerbal Space Program, while still an arguably obscure videogame, seems to be falling into the trap of divide-and-conquer style exclusive content. One of the great things that has kept Kerbal Space Program relevant and alive for so many years is the endless sea of community-made plug-ins and add-ons that allowed users to almost limitlessly modify their gameplay experience and do things that would be impossible with the limits of the development capabilities and interests of Squad. While one player could be sending Bill to the Mun in a cardboard box, another could be flying Valentina from the real-world planet Earth to Alpha Centauri by collecting the energy from an artificial microscopic black hole, the beautiful thing would be that these two are playing the exact same game. Look up a video on YouTube about circularizing into a polar orbit around Ike with a 900-ton SSTO passenger spaceplane? No problem, if they are using mods just install for free (or a modest donation to the modmaker if you can afford it (i love you, modding community )) or see if it can be done without the mod! Unfortunately DLC can make this a lot more complicated. The player community now becomes divided, and with enough DLCs even alienated from each other. "Does anyone have any tips for making an Eeloo lander?" -"Using the Soyuz DLC or the Curiosity+Pallas pre-order Combo Package?" "I play in stock." And this is just for casual players. Modding will become a nightmare, plug-ins will not only need to be updated to be compatible with updates on the base game but potentially with DLC content as well. It is almost without question that some modders will either abandon or avoid compatibility maintenance for anything but the core game. Worse yet, perhaps a very useful and interesting mod comes along but for whatever reason it only works side-by-side with a particular DLC, and immediately tons of players are barred from downloading something that would be free if not for the fact that they cannot afford or are not interested in said DLC. Speaking of which, I am thoroughly impressed with the dev team's work on the mission maker in Making History. I have been learning SideFX Houdini as of late which uses similar UI structure and it makes me happy that more and more software is using node-based programming. However, I am admittedly disappointed in the decision to allocate resources to creating historical parts. Don't get me wrong, the DLC parts are incredibly well-made and beautifully textured as usual, but I feel this was the job that the modding community had been taking care of for a very long time already, with countless add-ons already featuring similar parts. Spending so much time on replicating early space missions as a part of the stock game seems almost... dry. Part of the fun of stock KSP was that the parts you had at your disposal were vaguely similar to motors and pods and tanks used in real life but with their own design of originality to them, so that any replica mission you carry out will automatically have its own Kerbal twist to it, which is really charming. If you'll all allow me the liberty of ignoring the other features (since mission-making will likely be a relatively niche endeavor), charging $15 for something that can be acquired for free through mods seems a bit cheap on Squad's part. However I have a lot of respect for the KSP development team and doubt they would consciously stoop to the level of Electronic Arts. While Ubisoft is driven by greed, Squad is driven by passion, and that is what makes KSP so different from other big game titles. The devs are loving of their work, but they are not stupid. Money is definitely a consideration to be had, and I am by no means forgetting that. Everyone's gotta eat, of course. Like I said before, I am not big on marketing and I don't know much about Squad's planning, but I do bear some concern for the future of Kerbal Space Program's reputation as a game held in the palm of its community rather than grasped by the fist of a company. Perhaps I am fulfilling a certain role in the story of Chicken Little... this was mainly a disorganized ramble now that I look back at it. Feels better now that I'm posting it though
  7. Is there any way at all to get the reactors (and the open cycle engines from Kerbal Atomics) to interact with Kerbalism's radiation system? Or is it assumed that the reactors are already adequately shielded?
  8. Very cool stuff. Hope to see more become of the H body Might've been mentioned before, but... will there ever be an extension that has adapters for the Mark IV mod?
  9. So all I need to do is change the recipes so that Ore can no longer be turned into LFO and just make it so that the ISRUs use a different resource to make fuel?
  10. There seems to be a couple H type parts intended for solitary use though. This does't need a cockpit I don't think, the drone cor is already more than enough haha
  11. Editor Extensions just seems... incomplete, I guess. It's quite good but does things a little differently than I'd like. i.e. something that visualizes every vertex of the part geometry (or every other vertex, or every fourth vertex, etc.) and snaps the the parts to that vertex to allow for absolute mathematical control over a craft. This would be handy for wheels especially, I think. It also doesn't have any multi-vertical tools that work like the stock symmetry tool. Basically, it doesn't really cure the tedious stock "wiggle it until it's good enough" craft building experience I'll take a look at those mods you linked though, thanks
  12. Does this have universal resource control for the VAB? i.e. sliders for each individual resource in all of the liquid fuel tanks, oxidizer, monoprop, etc. that can be used to track how the center of mass changes as fuel is depleted?
  13. I don't know much about rocket science but AFAIK rocket tanks are just aluminium alloys, which aren't combustible. The mod only does this for empty fuel tanks, the explosion intensity increases based on how much fuel is in the tank You can always remove it from the config if you like, after all.
  14. I like the H standalone fuselage a lot, even though it's so simple and nigh useless when we already have the stock Mk2 parts. Any plans to add in more parts for the H series so that an entire plane body can be made with just those?
  15. what sort of config edits do i need to make so that reaction wheels use the most realistic nerfed strength at all times, regardless of SAS being on or off? Also, what's the recommended difficulty for the most realistic behavior?
  16. Just looking for a mod that does some stuff similar to Editor Extensions. Mostly functionality for attaching things to an exact longitude of a part, widgets for aligning radial parts, and properly working angle-snap that puts things perpendicular to the surface, as well as a linear analog of the radial symmetry tool. Is there any such mod that can do this or that can be configured to do so?
  17. Try Blast Awesomeness Modifier, it also makes it so that empty fuel tanks don't explode but just kinda puff like the kerbalnauts
  18. Inline Ballutes is pretty nice. Might not be what you're looking for, though
  19. Hey that might just be what I'm looking for! All I need to do is edit some of the configs i guess. Thanks, man! Right? So silly that something that can be processed into LFO also gets processed into radio dishes and rocket engines.
  20. I use way too many mods to maintain SMURFF behavior. Just need to know if the difficulty of launching rockets through the van Allen belts is as hard as it is IRL as it is in Kerbalism RSS
  • Create New...