Jump to content

Ember12

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    166

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Ember12

  1. Ember12
    I think a fairly large gap in KSP's parts is the lack of truncated (meaning they get thinner along their length) service bays. They would open up a lot of new possibilities for spacecraft that have to ascend through an atmosphere. I would also love taller truncated fuel tanks, although this is mainly so I could build rockets shaped like the N1.
  2. Ember12
    This idea would definitely need some ironing out, but: maybe you could have "monitors", little parts that you put on your spacecraft that provide structural information when your spacecraft does something new and structure-involving, like landing on some world or docking. You could have different types of monitors for developing other solid parts like thermal tech.
  3. Ember12
    One problem is that rare astronomical events are, well, rare. The timescales involved are literally astronomical, so unless the game has far more of these events than really exist, you'll have millions of years between them, which is probably longer than the game is meant to go for.
  4. Ember12
    Both Voyagers went through the heliopause without taking any noticeable damage at all, so it seems unlikely that vaporization would be a problem for a starship traveling orders of magnitude faster.
  5. Ember12
    I don't think there's enough radiation out there to vaporize anything. Sure it could cause some damage to kerbals and maybe electronics, but not structural damage.
  6. Ember12
    The devs have said that there are engines unlocked after interstellar engines, so there will probably be a bunch of other stuff too.
  7. Ember12
    I hope I didn't kill this discussion...
  8. Ember12
    Sure, but a storm is a LOT more complicated to simulate than a bit of wind. Many in that discussion thought that modeling weather systems, even for purely cosmetic purposes, would be incredibly difficult. I think the sail idea is quite workable. I was only saying that waves, and especially storms, require a huge amount of processing power to simulate well.
  9. Ember12
    Sails might very well be implemented. I was mainly saying that there probably won't be storms. I believe that people don't want a complex weather system because of this recent discussion, where people seemed mostly negative about the idea.
  10. Ember12
    It was recently established that people think an advanced weather system isn't going to happen, so storms and waves don't seem likely. On a more general note, I think that boats could be incredibly useful. They could be used to transfer resources over short distances, for instance, or to putter around the seas of Laythe or Eve for getting Science. They could also be used to recover spent rocket stages from the sea, as in this animation, which would offer a much easier way to build reusable rocket systems. Given all these possible uses, I think that dedicated boat hulls and engines would be well worth the effort of coding them in.
  11. Ember12
    Thanks for the clarification. To be absolutely clear about what I meant: In many languages, if a syllable does not have emphasis, it is pronounced differently. For instance, "instance" is pronounced "IN-stuhns" not "IN-stans". If Russian, if the letter ё (yo) is in a word, it is always stressed. Just how the language works. In other Cyrillic-using languages, this may not be the case. So, while ё is pronounced fully in Russian, it may be pronounced differently in other languages where it is not necessarily stressed. So I thought that the clarification as Russian might be helpful.
  12. Ember12
    The ambiguity is always in the part between the L and the V. The Russian letter is ё, which ALWAYS says "yo". As far as I know, the only reason why anyone writes it as "Korolev" is because the letter looks like an e. Korolov is okay, but it omits the y sound. Devs: If you use something like this, please spell it with a yo! As you may have gathered, this is something of a pet peeve of mine.
  13. Ember12
    I would love a rocket scientist named "Sergei Kerbalyov" after Sergei Korolyov.
  14. Ember12
    One issue is that, in KSP, planes aren't that useful unless they go to space. You can putter around Kerbin and get a bit of science from each biome, but it's a tiny amount and the flights are long. In many of my career & science mode games I don't even bother with non-space planes. One way to encourage use of atmosphere-only planes would be if certain resources were much more highly concentrated at locations far from KSC. The player's first automated transports could be subsonic airplanes delivering ore and fuel from remote locations on Kerbin.
  15. Ember12
    What I meant was, with what was suggested, it would be harder to create an orbit-capable spaceplane, and some players might want that to be easy.
  16. Ember12
    I think this might tap a bit into the old "how hard should planes be" debate. Personally I find plane design just as interesting as rockets, but from what I've seen a lot of people don't. I love this idea and I think it would be fun for me to play, but many others could feel differently.
  17. Ember12
    We know that there will be automatic supply missions, and I can't imagine how those would work without scripting.
  18. Ember12
    When the second N1 rocket crashed back onto the launchpad, it was exploded with around 7 kilotons TNT of force. The rocket was a bit smaller than a Saturn V, and only around 15% of the fuel was consumed in the blast. With some KSP2 rockets which will be much, much bigger, we're talking Hiroshima-sized (15 kiloton) or possibly much larger explosions. That might get a bit tricky to simulate.
  19. Ember12
    One could have a basic sorting system for assemblies, like the "Prototypes, structures, planes" thing you proposed, with players free to create their own subcategories. I'm not sure this is a good idea, because changing a design without seeing what the change did could cause issues. Like, if you give a booster taller side stages, they might end up inside a wider upper stage. This would also be nearly impossible without a root part mechanic
  20. Ember12
    I think a weather system would be great, but not a complicated one. Wind that blow planes around, fog that impairs visibility, and rain that makes ground slippery. I don't think any of those would need anything too hard.
  21. Ember12
    I think that what you meant by that (hilarious) image that is that expressing weather effects is fairly simple. I would disagree, because a lot of these effects are very complicated to create. Wet during rain- Does this mean everything gets darker? More shiny? Both? Dry and Shadow On Ground- pretty much already exist. White on top- I don't think that making every upward-facing surface white will look like snow. To look realistic it would probably need some depth, at least a few centimeters, and then you start getting into the physics of driving through the stuff. Can't See Stone- Fairly simple I guess, just blur and whiten more and more as the object gets farther away. Swinging Stone- now you're getting into the complex realm of fluid dynamics. Stone Gone- Like above but more so. I think that implementing all of this would definitely take enough resources that it would detract from other parts of the game. The question is is it worth it, which people seem to think is a "no".
  22. Ember12
    Even if all the problems mentioned above (and more will no doubt be posted below) were overcome, I can't imagine this as anything more than an oh-yeah-that's-kinda-cool thing. Probably, no one would even look at it more than once or twice. Not at all worth the difficulty of implementation IMO.
  23. Ember12
    This has been brought up before, but: Managing surface colonies will he hard. If any significant fraction of all players are in the same game, equatorial land on every world will be snapped up very fast, so most people will have to make do with high-latitude land. That assuming the game perfectly prevents colonies being built in the same place in different time-warps. Plus players would probably have to wait for launchpad access on Kerbin. If KSP2 does go with big server groups, I think they should be kept at a few hundred members at most. It's still a lot, but these problems should be more manageable in a smaller server, while still having enough players to keep things interesting.
  24. Ember12
    Imagine the range of an asparagus-staged Daedalus ship...
  25. Ember12
    Kerbals are already immortal (at least they don't die of old age) and I don't think they'll add a kerbal aging mechanic. Plus:
×
×
  • Create New...