Jump to content

BowlerHatGuy3

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    184

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BowlerHatGuy3

  1. BowlerHatGuy3
    Its the bottom for me.
  2. BowlerHatGuy3
    Its four players per agency not per game.
  3. BowlerHatGuy3
    Hehe
  4. BowlerHatGuy3
    The title is self explanatory. Newest Version of KSP 2 Intel Core I7 Ram: 16gb RTX 3050 laptop gpu Windows 11
  5. BowlerHatGuy3
    This is like day 900 of people asking for there to be some kind of stock scripting. All we can do right now is wait and see.
  6. BowlerHatGuy3
    I didn't realize I needed this until now.
  7. BowlerHatGuy3
    A more straightforward system would definitely work. But what would happen once you unlock all've the types? Early game it could be interesting but soon enough it could just become something akin to checking your staging or a gimmick rather than something you'd actually need to think about.
  8. BowlerHatGuy3
    Any and all spacesuits for Kerbals in KSP were always cosmetic. As long as you had a spacesuit, you could go anywhere in the Kerbol System with no problems. The Breaking Ground DLC added a little bit more gameplay to it but little else. But what if there was more? My idea for spacesuit progression in KSP2 works like this. You start out with essentially an old, decrepit, extremely depressing space suit that doesn't really do anything other than shield your Kerbal from the vacuum of space. You have no jetpack to move around, and rather have to attach many ladders and bars so that your Kerbal can maneuver their way around the craft. Your Kerbal has a tether attached to them, so you can only go so far (it would be nice to be able to pull yourself back to the craft using the tether in case your Kerbal starts to float away). The more science and resources you get, the more base space suits and extensions you unlock. Over the course of the game, you might unlock a general space suit, a high-pressure suit for thick atmospheres, a G force suit that let's Kerbals experience higher Gs before blacking out, a high mobility suit that lets your Kerbal walk/run faster on surfaces etc. You would also unlock extensions that increase a space suit's functionality. Depending on where they're going, you could give your Kerbal headlights, a larger EVA pack that makes them more mobile in vacuum, climbing gear that lets them climb much steeper surfaces, or even robotic arms that lets them do science on the go. To stop players from create these weird frankenstein mech suits that can do anything, suits would have a maximum weight and be limited to one per Kerbal. This would force the player to make unique suits for every mission that they go on, which would aid in the realism department since that's what NASA and other irl space agencies do. What do you guys think?
  9. BowlerHatGuy3
    They should only happen at high gforces. It would also be pretty cool if there are only contrails on the ends of a wing chain instead of occurring on every flight surface.
  10. BowlerHatGuy3
    Yeah, but thats less of a shockwave and more of a tf2 rocket jump.
  11. BowlerHatGuy3
    I feel the reentry heating wasn’t substantial enough in Kerbal 1. Even with the heat setting set up all’ve the way, it wasn’t uncommon for your craft to come out unscathed for the most part, only having a destroyed engine or thingamabob (especially on Kerbin). It’s more realistic to have most of if not all of your craft destroyed. Same thing for really hot engines such as the nuke engines. You could get away burning your nuclear engine for pretty long time without any heating happening. I think that adding radiators should be a must in Ksp2, especially for the larger nuclear engines. Now explosions. Explosions in both Ksps are mostly cosmetic. They don’t create any tangible shockwaves as far as I’m aware. But what if they did? Rocket explosions irl are humongous, creating shockwaves comparable to that of bombs. Representing this in Kerbal 2 would give larger rocket launches higher stakes since you wouldn’t want to destroy your colony or space station. It would also make multiplayer a lot more interesting.
  12. BowlerHatGuy3
    Haven’t seen anyone talk about this. Kerbal ragdolling was half the fun of Kerbal 1.
  13. BowlerHatGuy3
    I just want inflatables in general. I need to be able to create a spy balloon.
  14. BowlerHatGuy3
    As someone who has and is living in a heavily forested area, the trees don’t look right to me. They don’t blend into the environment like you would expect them too, but instead stick out like a sore thumb. Different species of trees are also in the wrong places. Being at the equator, the KSC should be mostly surrounded bushes, palm trees and a more tropical environment past the mountains. Instead it looks like the English country side. The island with the runway also has pines on it? I know it’s nitpicky but these kind of details really help with immersion. It’d be really cool to land in a rainforest, desert, or a large forest with redwood trees. Seeing animals would also be pretty cool ngl .
  15. BowlerHatGuy3
    Just a suggestion for when reentry heating is added. When SpaceX boosters come back from space to land they do a reentry burn that not only slows them down but also decreases the amount of heat damage done to the craft. You can see it in this video here: Being able to use your engine as a heat shield would make room for some very cool challenges and last minute saves. The plume fx adapting would also be a nice touch.
  16. BowlerHatGuy3
    We’ve already discussed the specifics here on the forum. Personally I want to be able to take my airplanes in Kerbal 2 further. So far though, other than the procedural wings the aero system feels the same. I think it would be nice for there to be an optional more advanced aero system so that players that want a more realistic experience can have that, but it keeps the casual community happy. What do you think?
  17. BowlerHatGuy3
    Jiggly rockets are absolutely intentional as the jigglyness would be a very easy fix, as in literally changing a few numbers. I do think that they should stay for the most part to make sure that you don’t make your rocket too tall and so that your craft can be pulled apart by wind forces. But as they are in the game right now rockets are way too flaccid. Just adding autostrut is kind of a lazy fix imo. I’d much rather have them change the actual values.
  18. BowlerHatGuy3
    Been waiting for this since I first played in middle school. The hype is uncontainable!!!!!!!
  19. BowlerHatGuy3
    Ehh I don’t know about that. I’ve lost too much trust in game developers to consider that.
  20. BowlerHatGuy3
    If the explosion is big enough create a shockwave that destroys everything within a few kilometers.
  21. BowlerHatGuy3
    Explosions!!!!!! >:)
  22. BowlerHatGuy3
    True
  23. BowlerHatGuy3
    @Pthigrivi Are you replying to the right post? I’m not arguing for gender specifications I’m arguing against it. Discussing which pronouns should and shouldn’t be used has a time and a place, and Kerbal ain’t it.
  24. BowlerHatGuy3
    I agree on this for sandbox, but not the career modes. If you could build a rocket however big you want on the ground, there would be no reason to build shipyards or colonies. The only reason this wasn’t a problem in Kerbal 1 is because most parts were relatively small and anything bigger than a Saturn V would cause your game to crash. Forcing rockets made on Kerbin to have a lower Delta V would encourage you to build new bases on other planets, which for career is a good thing.
  25. BowlerHatGuy3
    Dude who cares…
×
×
  • Create New...