Jump to content

MiffedStarfish

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,470

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by MiffedStarfish

  1. MiffedStarfish
    Landing for the first time on the Mun. With 12 units of fuel left. I had had the game for nearly 3 years at this point, and never gone beyond a Kerbin orbit, just spent all my time building stock combat ground vehicles. I didn't even intend to land on the Mun on launch, my lander was just a nonfuctional SSTO I had got frustrated with and strapped a massive booster to. I then realised I had about half my fuel left and said to my friend who was watching, "screw it. Let's go to the Mun."
  2. MiffedStarfish
    Thanks! I built them solely for the purpose of looking cool, just turning them on makes me feel like I'm in Star Wars. @Siphon117 Sure, just give me credit for them. Be warned, a few downloads are outdated, I'll uptdate them all later. This series sounds interesting, I'm looking forward to it.
  3. MiffedStarfish
    Is this about KSP in any way? As it doesn't seem to mention it at all, and this is the KSP Fan works section. I sorta skim read it, and it seems all right, but stories tend to flow and read better with specific characters.
  4. MiffedStarfish
    Try going Eva, then getting as close as you can to 0ms relative velocity to the ship with the kerbal, then switch to the ship, target the kerbal and use fine RCS controls to exactly 0 your relative velocity to the kerbal. Hope this helps.
  5. MiffedStarfish
    I think the core problem with career mode is that science, and by extension part unlocking, is just not done right. When making career mode, the obvious thing to do with part progression was to have an unlocking system for all the parts in existance, while starting with bins full of dynamite. I think something that would work much better would be to, at the start give you a wide range of 2 or 3 parts of each type of part available, and through using them either significantly upgrade or unlock newer parts of the same type. For example, as opposed to unlocking the standard landing legs by recording your "observations about the situation" during orbital ascent looking out the window, you would instead upgrade or unlock the, by touching down with a cruder version on 2 bodies with significantly different gravity. (I.E. The Mun and Minmus) that way you still have to manage your space program and build it from the ground up, while having some freedom to do your own thing in the first part of the save, while not just giving you everything in sandbox. Another thing that needs to be redone to keep the game semi-believable would be reworked contracts. Why the hell would a company want to test a decoupler on a suborbital Eeloo trajectory? A much more realistic and vaguely sensible contract would be to do something like "put a comunication satellite in a orbit giving it a signal to the western continent," or when the game progresses something like "move 5000 units of ore from our Ike mining station to our Duna base." A lot more civilian company's would have to be added, but that wouldn't be to hard. Overall, this would allow you to progress your part catalogue with the parts you want and need in a relevant way that actually made sense. This is all coming from someone who booted up the career uptdate for the first time, started a save and stopped playing after an hour as there was no variation in gameplay, so if there have been any major changes since then all of this could be completely irrelevant.
  6. MiffedStarfish
    I could be not thinking, but don't cars and trucks in the UK have right hand steering wheels? Looks like a fun, original challenge. I might give it a go later.
  7. MiffedStarfish
    Can I do it with stock attacking craft?
  8. MiffedStarfish
    Still Alive. Best song ever written.
  9. MiffedStarfish
    @DarkOwl57 any uptdate on when you can do your turn? If it's a long time, (a week+) is there any chance you could let @ShadowGoat move your destroyer, under your direction?
  10. MiffedStarfish
    Did Someone say... Stock american fighter replicas? F-4 Phantom F-5E Tiger II The Tiger II was a pain to build especially, the fuselage just has so many strange lines and curves with no obvious parts to build with.
  11. MiffedStarfish
    Ooh, shiny. I like the frigate, looks functional and mass efficient at 61 tons. The first few don't look very protected though... Any chance of you building a light 10-15 ton fighter in the style of the Falcion? It would look really good with the side curved plates.
  12. MiffedStarfish
    My school's computing teacher left at Christmas, and there isn't a new one yet. So my class's scheduled "computing" period consists of tidying up the music teachers room. And it doesn't help that along with science and technology studies, computing is one of the only subjects I'm actually interested in and enjoy. And English is so utterly mind numbingly boring, It's challenging to think of a positive thought about it. (I actually really enjoy and spend a lot of time reading books, this isn't just personal dislike of the subject)
  13. MiffedStarfish
    I was always more of stock person, but these look like great replicas, well done. The gunship looks really accurate especially, stock parts can be a bit limiting on smooth and rounded ships like the LAAT, but you definitely pulled it off. Have some rep.
  14. MiffedStarfish
    One rule that i think is absolutely necessary if ramming was allowed, would be a distance limit. Say, a ram can only be done if the ramming burn was started at 0.0m/s relative to the target, from a maximum distance of 150m away. Otherwise you get people going into retrograde orbits and colliding at orbital speeds x2. Even so, I think ramming should only be allowed in friendly style battles, like the battle of the titans or our after battle ship-spamfest.
  15. MiffedStarfish
    I don't think ramming should be allowed at all. Within a few battles it would descend to ships consisting solely of vector engines, reaction wheels and a 100 metre I-beam pole on the end. Unstoppable, and quite possibly reusable. Just my thoughts. @DarkOwl57 any chance of doing your turn today? I understand you have a lot of work, and that needs to be prioritized, but if you can get it up today I can do quite a few turns tomorrow, as it's a holiday for me.
  16. MiffedStarfish
    Have you made some improvements to the death? One simple change I just thought of was swapping the I-Beams and the cluster nukes around, as the nukes are guided, and I-Beams aren't the most accurate weapons, and the more centralised they are the better.
  17. MiffedStarfish
    I'm halfway between a pilot and an engineer. On one hand, I spend a load of time playing pinball with the space centre buildings, one of my favourite things to do is deploy landing gear and attempt to skid along the side of the VAB. But on the other hand, I won't fly anything that hasn't been tested and proven to do its job in the intended scenario. This means hours and hours of minor tweaks, but I don't mind, building is my other favourite thing in this game.
  18. MiffedStarfish
    @AlexanderTeaH I'll have to battle you on Sunday, as I'll be away from computers until then. Would you mind setting up the persist?
  19. MiffedStarfish
    By uncertified I meant that I wouldn't normally use it in a battle, not that it shouldn't ever be used in battle. @dragonaether I would say between 3 and 6 ships for a normal battle. As for weaponary, we all have our own different styles and types of weapons, for example, shadow goat uses lots of moderate damage overwhelming missiles, while I use less missiles, but with a focus on presicion hits and high speeds.
  20. MiffedStarfish
    But biggest dosent always translate to strongest, evidently. I'm sorry, that was mean. Here, have some money rep. @Spartwo I'm not sure whether the fight between the Hyperion and the death would count on the leaderboard. On one hand, we fully complied with the rules, making it eligible, but on the other hand, it lasted two turns between two ships. What do you think?
  21. MiffedStarfish
    There is a tonnage limit of 15 tons max for each fighter, but no limit on the number of fighters. But keep in mind that most battles have a fleet tonnage limit of max 300 tons, and a ship is useless if it's too heavy to use.
  22. MiffedStarfish
    @ShadowGoat I've already won! You posted the persist, your turn is over, sorry. @dragonaether I would recommend reading through the rules fully, it prevents lot of little easily avoidable mistakes. Do you have pictures of your ships? They sound interesting. As you don't want to use structual panels for aesthetic reasons, I would just cover the panels with wing plates, they are slightly larger than panels, so no seams, and they look a lot better than bare metal.
  23. MiffedStarfish
    <sigh> fine... F-5E Tiger II I have a working MiG-25, but no pictures right now. The F-14 will take me awhile, I better get working on my stock hinges.
  24. MiffedStarfish
    Even better! the thing that threw me was the lack of visible VTOL engines. If I'm right, just past the cockpit there is a Aerospike in a shroud. What does it do?
  25. MiffedStarfish
    Maybe, I don't think the armour is the problem, more the structual layout. But send it, I'll try to help.
×
×
  • Create New...