Jump to content

gluckez

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    114

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by gluckez

  1. gluckez
    1) A flat landing spot in the mohole 2) Robotics 3) More science equipment 4) EVA construction 5) Refueling and mining equipment 6) multipoint docking/attachments 7) permanent docking (for in orbit assembly or larger ships) 8) being able to target a planet from the map view without zooming in on it because there's a ship there 9) scrolling in the VAB, because it's super glitchy and barely works 10) everything else is already listed I think.
  2. gluckez
    wow, nice work to all the devs! before this update, I played a total of about 4 hours. Since this update launched, I have played 6 and I don't want to stop xD
  3. gluckez
    only 7 days left! are we still on track for the release?
  4. gluckez
    I think the science tree in ksp1 was too easy to unlock. it only took me a few missions to unlock like half of it, and I finished it several times in new saves before I got bored of that save. There's no reason to keep doing science if you've already unlocked everything, so I think this will make it more challenging, and keep me busy on a single save file for a lot longer.
  5. gluckez
    nice there should be a challenge to put each flag on its matching planet
  6. gluckez
    I think the concept of a propeller itself should be considered, it's really nothing more than a wheel with wings attached. introducing specific propeller components is one possibility, but to me there's more freedom if you split this up into it's own seperate parts. A rotating component could be used for artificial gravity for example if you rotate it slower and attach habitation modules, but it could also be used to achieve lift if you attach wings. So perhaps a simpler solution would be to use different size, configurable rotators, combined with procedural wings. EDIT: combine this with the option to save crafts as individual components and you can easily make your own propellors that you can attach to your craft
  7. gluckez
    I'm not laughing, I'm amazed If you got that thing into space, just imagine what you could do after the next update, with less wobblyness and improved performance
  8. gluckez
    This is one of the first things I did in ksp2. my cover photo is Tim and Valentina strolling on the beach of laythe. They returned safely and landed at the KSC afterwards.
  9. gluckez
    oh, wow, I was expecting this on friday nice job dev team!
  10. gluckez
    well, if you are going to make a multi stage rocket, you'll probably need decouplers between stages xD
  11. gluckez
    No worries From what I've seen, the 0.1.5 will be bugfixes before the For Science update. so no new features yet. but I could be wrong.
  12. gluckez
    The last patch was almost a month ago, so I'm sure somebody would've logged a bug by now Can you post a screenshot of the rocket? maybe just a link to both the rocket in the VAB and on the launch pad. Since it's a tutorial on staging, maybe check if you have decouplers and stuff, if it's mentioned in the tutorial.
  13. gluckez
    @Sharmarvelous I haven't seen this error yet, but could it be there's a loose part somewhere in the VAB that you haven't deleted, and maybe ksp sees that as a subassembly? Either way, the error should probably be more descriptive of what's actually happening. It might be worthwhile to restart the tutorial and rebuild the rocket.
  14. gluckez
    I understand the pessimism, I'm cautiously optimistic from what I've seen. But even if they don't make it as amazing as it's portrayed, it will still be a big jump to finally be able to do science with somewhat stable rockets. I don't think I'll be massively disappointed if it doesn't turn out as great as they're showing it, but hey, I'll at least have something to keep me busy in the game.
  15. gluckez
    who knows, they might get a personalized kerbal. I would totally send Anth Kerman on research missions, seems like a competent guy.
  16. gluckez
    As a professional bug exterminator, I can guarantee you, proper observations, analysis and reporting are some of the most underappreciated skills in software development. don't sell yourself short, you're doing an amazing job.
  17. gluckez
    I absolutely respect that, I have to say I probably said a lot of stuff that's wrong as well. I think it just comes down to our love for the game like you said. We all want it to succeed and there's a lot of emotion that comes with that.
  18. gluckez
    did they happen to give any indication of when?
  19. gluckez
    yeah, My bad. @Spicat mentioned that in his comment at the same time I was typing mine, so I missed that. Although updating Unity versions can be tricky as well, especially if assets don't transfer properly, and prefabs break. I've had a lot of issues with that myself. As for patch 5, I really hope it drops soon because 1 hotfix in 2 months is just not good enough. I know it's difficult, but to have no news on what's happening is just a pain
  20. gluckez
    lol, that's not gonna happen.
  21. gluckez
    I'm usually very defensive of the devs, because I'm a software developer myself. I understand sometimes things can take a while to fix or implement. Even though I'm a very patient guy, they're actually really testing my patience right now. The last update was 18 days ago, and it was a hotfix. Before that, the last actual update was a month earlier and the only real thing we got from the devs was an AMA about wobbly rockets. Now, I'm all for fixing wobbly rockets, and from what I understand from a technical standpoint is that it's a very difficult problem to tackle, but they really need to get some info out there on what's happening. Even if it's something as small as a time window in which they will release the next update, just any sort of information would be nice.
  22. gluckez
    As I mentioned 2 comments before the one you quoted. This is likely why they have 6 development branches, so they can develop the features further while also working on the base game.
  23. gluckez
    my exact quote was: what's stopping you from going through the code and seeing for yourself then? so it's not like I'm asking people to just believe me. so no, I'm not "banking on people to not do that". I'm not sure if you've actually ever started a new project in an IDE, but that's not what that looks like. And how would you even know what it looks like? since it's against the EULA and you haven't broken it? What I also want to point out is that a EULA is not legally binding, it is an agreement, and if you break that agreement, the company is not obligated to provide a service to you. Another thing is that the EULA also states that in order to enter the agreement, you must be an adult of the legal age of majority in your country of residence. I doubt that everyone who bought the game is.. So as stated above, no, I have not "illegally" seen anything. and even if it was illegal in the US the decompile something, I'm not a US citizen, and where I am from it's absolutely legal.
  24. gluckez
    But as you can see on this forum, and on Reddit, that's not what they do. it's not their job, and they would rather complain. Plus, if you introduce a new feature that just blatantly breaks the game, you'll need to be extremely quick to patch it, even though the exact issue isn't known and could require an overhaul of one or more systems. for example: what if they introduce orbital assembly now, and it somehow breaks the VAB? players won't even be able to get into orbit to test the feature and no one will be able to play the game. All they would get is complaints of the community and management might be inclined to shut the project down completely. Also, EA is not to test new features, from the steamworks documentation:
  25. gluckez
    True, but just because it turns out the heating system needs an overhaul, doesn't mean every feature does. Sometimes it just happens that a feature doesn't scale and integrate well with the rest of the game. The roadmap features that are already in the game aren't the full feature that the developers have access to. it's the base components of those features that are finished and could cause regression when added later. what's stopping you from going through the code and seeing for yourself then?
×
×
  • Create New...