Jump to content

Bej Kerman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,011

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bej Kerman

  1. Bej Kerman
    Really, tell me. What use is a planned orbit if you don't have the propellant to achieve it. For high TWRs, maybe, but KSP 2 isn't forcing you to use high TWRs like KSP 1. You have to consider that "course of the burn" is necessary for low TWR vessels, which I doubt people will be hesitant to use with the improved maneuver nodes and thrust in warp. So you don't need me to tell you that a hydrogen tanker pushed by a massive ion tug would depend on the maneuver prediction knowing its thrust and propellant mass in order to plan its transfer. You really shouldn't need me to tell you that the TWR of a torch drive driven ship (when we get those) cannot use the impulse nodes of KSP 1 for trip planning.
  2. Bej Kerman
    If you don't mind sharing, your expertise in the gaming industry is...?
  3. Bej Kerman
    How else would it know how your vessel will move over the course of the burn?
  4. Bej Kerman
    I don't do discussions with people who want to use logical fallacies as an argument to why bugs aren't happening. multiple times now you have dismissed people expressing concern because "oh these bugs aren't happening to me so they must be lying about them happening I assume you were attempting to quote this? I don't see any logically fallacious arguments here. I can attest to their experience as well. A few bugs here and there like the Mission Control announcer popping in when I'm in the VAB if I don't go to the KSC before entering it, or a vessel giving itself a landed state while in the air (not as gamebreaking here as this was in KSP 1 where it shut timewarp off), but nothing that's enough to end a mission.
  5. Bej Kerman
    Love it and the new voice direction. Only thing that doesn't make sense to me is that it's made out like you can't use ions to drive heavy crewed vehicles a la the Hermes as well - you couldn't do it in KSP 1 only because of timewarp and electricity limitations, but those aren't there in KSP 2 with a readily available reactor, large batteries and the ability to accelerate time while burning without any mods. In fact, with such a vessel, it probably wouldn't be necessary to have more than one engine with a sufficiently high orbit from the moment you ditch your upper stage, and the new maneuver nodes make it more than easy enough to plot trajectories for such vessels.
  6. Bej Kerman
    They are doing some work, just on that stupid Discord server...
  7. Bej Kerman
    When they lied saying they needed extra time to make that the case How can they lie about that when they said nothing of the sort, and all we heard is that the game was delayed, nothing else?
  8. Bej Kerman
    That's not a reason, the VAB isn't tiny and and these limitations aren't realistic.
  9. Bej Kerman
    <s> Like the time they lied about the game running perfectly on mid-tier hardware? </s>
  10. Bej Kerman
    No they're all just people. And people can love up. And when they love up repeatedly, believing they will stop loveing up in the future is a nice thought but not the most likely outcome. For what KSP 2 is after only ~3 years, and given all the background content being worked on at the same time, I wouldn't consider it much of a love-up
  11. Bej Kerman
    It's a better alternative to fixed limitations that have no reason or rhyme behind them.
  12. Bej Kerman
    <s> No, because everyone is a devil apparently </s>
  13. Bej Kerman
    Such as making x number go down until it's below y? Believe me, a game about engineering of all things shouldn't resort to fixed values. If you are brute forcing stuff, that's on you and isn't an indication of how others might choose to make a rocket that stays together.
  14. Bej Kerman
    And this is what I've been trying to tell @Alexoff et al. KSP 2 is already big for how young it is, that's not even considering the roadmap features that the devs have been working on over the same three years as the core experience. Glad to hear it from professionals
  15. Bej Kerman
    The dynamic limit is mess around and find out until you find something that works. I would hate to be fighting arbitrary limits that have nothing to do with the rocket itself. Noodles aren't pretty but joint stress can at least be worked into something more realistic, and either way it gives you an engineering problem rather than a "make sure this number doesn't get bigger than x" problem.
  16. Bej Kerman
    Honestly, dynamic limitations introduced by your designs and their physics sounds a million times better than arbitrary limitations imposed by fixed values that have no reason to exist besides Da Balance
  17. Bej Kerman
    What?
  18. Bej Kerman
    There's nothing specific I need to say about my attempts to go between two stars using Blueshift crashing if I dare timewarp too quickly.
  19. Bej Kerman
    I run on similar enough hardware and get quite a bit more frames than this sheet would indicate.
  20. Bej Kerman
    Those are all problems that will either be eliminated or eased by how KSP 2 has been built
  21. Bej Kerman
    At that point you'd have to intentionally be ignoring them.
  22. Bej Kerman
    If you can seriously believe interstellar in KSP 1 worked well... Such as the fact multiplayer is in a working state and that many roadmap features were found by dataminers to be in KSP 2? Enjoy the high road while it lasts.
  23. Bej Kerman
    I like the retro look.
  24. Bej Kerman
    What about those of us that like it?
  25. Bej Kerman
    So it helps the game has been designed from the ground up to support it
×
×
  • Create New...