Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sea_Kerman

  1. big supersonic plane with a cargo bay, drop the lander can out with paracutes
  2. I definitely agree with the off-center and cramped feel. This needs to be fixed. I'm worried this will fall into the big pool of little things KSP1 does better that KSP2 might never get.
  3. I agree on the need to reduce the whitespace in the navball (and moving it closer to the screen edge), it feels huge right now. Also whitespace in the PAM
  4. for the huge stuff perhaps we could be allowed to control our regular engines with the RCS controls
  5. I reiterate that the way KSP1 handled the maneuver node editing (in later versions) was great, it allowed a quick and rough editing, and precise numerical values, all without having to be able to see the physical node.
  6. the trajectories mod for ksp1 was able to give a rough estimate, and you could tell it what you planned to do
  7. Having 2 different modes, secant and tangent, would be nice. Tangent is what we currently have, and it is best suited to long burns where the new (amazing) full trajectory simulation is useful. Not really possible to "split" a burn around the maneuver when the burn involves several SOI transitions, lol. Secant would be the new default, where it automatically offsets the maneuver start backward while keeping the pro/retro/normal/radial frame of refrence the same as the initial point. This would result in what we used to do in KSP1.
  8. Another issue I have with it is it's unnecessarily huge
  9. Yeah, the actual calculation of the path is really nice but they left out the one important thing. Time matters little, what actually matters is remaining delta-v. They should really count down the delta-v readout as required. If I use the maneuver node controller or micro engineer mod to display remaining delta-v and go off of that, my burns are quite precise.
  10. Another disadvantage of the PM is you can't have multiple parts open simultaneously. (well you can but only if they're next to each other in the PM list)
  11. and I hope it's actually simulated, not like in 1 where you get to a polar orbit and click a button and it's instant.
  12. Yeah, a good specific example is the fact that you unlock 2.5m tanks, engines, and pods quite a bit before you get a viable set of support parts to make a lander with it (an engine plate). the Poodle is just too big but you need an engine plate to do what you actually need for a lander: 1-2 Terriers.
  13. My primary use case is the ability to edit a node while not actually looking at it. And also the delta-v remaining readout
  14. yeah I definitely felt the lack of adapters and engine plates and interstage fairings and stuff specifically, the Poodle is way too big for a lot of stuff you'd want to do with a 2.5m upper stage/lander and there's no way to non-jankily use 2 Terriers instead
  15. Yeah this is like the one super important thing you actually need to see in the UI and it's missing.
  16. Definitely a way to edit a maneuver node even when you're not looking at it
  17. Didn't Nertea say that Comnet is more powerful now? every antenna is a relay and line of sight is not needed.
  18. Yeah, hopefully we get a scansat-like thing, perhaps orbital survey will evolve a bit
  19. Yeah, having (not very strict) LOS limitations added an actual reason to launch satellites and have more interesting mission architectures.
  20. Yeah I imagine infinite resources at KSC will quickly become less relevant when you start establishing other colonies less deep in a gravity well and closer to where you actually want to put things.
  • Create New...