Jump to content

Temeter

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,625

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Temeter

  1. Temeter
    Lots of good points! Yeah, that one really surprised me. I thought the part of the mission builders point was that you could add those missions into careers, creating more interesting contracts. Seems like a massive oversight to leave that much potential on the table. I've just checked, and Voskhod 1 had an offset center of mass, too. I mean, it makes sense, you don't want the thing to eternally tumble and, idk, break the pilots neck? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voskhod_(spacecraft) :
  2. Temeter
    I put skiffs on two 1.25m rockets; one bare and one with the 1.875 base. No difference in drag. Strange. edit: If below a 1.875 fuel tank (cone expansion on the rocket), then the one without base has a bit less drag. Very small difference, but even more strange. edit2: Similar results on a 1.875m rocket with the Kodiak enginese. Left is no shrouds, middle is small shroud, right is large shroud. The engine with no shroud has the least drag; the one with the 1.25m shrough has a tiny bit more drag, and the one with the fitting, 1.875m shroud, has the most drag. (higher mach is likely because of lower altitude) Seems bugged. The well fitting shroud should have the least amount of drag?
  3. Temeter
    That's the spirit! Question; do modders have the ability to use the new mission builder to make campaign contracts?
  4. Temeter
    Neat!
  5. Temeter
    Can be frustrating from that perspective, but cutoff date has to be somewhere. If the dlc was free all of 2013, then someone buying 2nd januar 2014 would be bothered. See it this way: It's better that some get free stuff than if everyone gets free stuff. It's irrational to get envious about that stuff. (disclaimer; I got it for free, but would have instantly bought it either way; KSP is one of my two most played games)
  6. Temeter
    I've done everything from high speed travel on low grav plants for fun and science, to moving refineries, tanks, colonization mod transports, jet driven world speed records, speed cars, rescue missions, etc. There is a lot of stuff you can do with wheels in a sandbox like KSP, which is why they're IMO ultra valuable to have. But I'd agree in that there is little vanilla limited gameplay reason to have rovers. Maybe the new missions system can set up more complex contracts that make you do more on other planets.
  7. Temeter
    I can think of a few things. Landing can has a cockpit with very really good visibility, the DLC dual landing cabin is suprisingly poor in that regard. Well, maybe not that surprising because the thing was designed for humans and Kerbals got eyes on what would be chest level for humans. Also is special in that it's a in stack 2.5m cockpit, and is better at fitting heat shields. Honestly though, I rarely use that thing. Looks too ugly for my taste, and the windows has ugly reflections blocking sight.
  8. Temeter
    Also, does anyone else see extremly high CPU/GPU usage? I got a small rocket on the launchpad, and I get 40% CPU and 100% GPU utilization, even a bit of stutter ingame. No mods. In space it's just 30% to 45% each.
  9. Temeter
    I think you're supposed to play the multiple times and go for harder and harder objective? You can 'win' by just making a basic objective. Felt a bit weird to me, but I like it under the idea that the missions throw challenges of opportunity at you, which you might overcome with reasonably overdesigned rockets and skill! That does feel really Kerbal, don't you think?
  10. Temeter
    On a more positive node, I'm positively surprised by the IVAs and tank models. Looks pretty good, much better than just the new 2.5m tanks! Weirdly enough, I've had it on that wrong layer for a long time before 1.4.^^
  11. Temeter
    1) Was already an issue before. I always had it that way. Thought it was normal, maybe a common bug? 2) Maybe a level of detail thing? Probably shouldn't happen on the player craft.
  12. Temeter
    That honestly sounds like a bug. Avoiding the probe problem seemd like the main issue it was to solve (and what a loveing annoyance it was!).
  13. Temeter
    I've just checked. The actual J-2 is actually a weaker engine, strangely enough. J-2 Skiff is 1 ton, 330 ISP and 300kn. Sounds like a case for the ablancing team^^' LV91 also looks a bit weak. Very low thrust for minimally better ISP compared to normal 1.25m engines, straightup downgrade from an aerospike. Otherwise balancing looks fine. IMO the Aerospike makes both an excellent upper stage and orbital engine, it's become a real powerhouse after it's buff. Also much easier to place and make artificial shrouds via payload bays.
  14. Temeter
    IMO the Poodle was always a bit underpowered, even after the buff. Sure it makes a solid orbital engine, but IMO the poodle should rather be an upper stage launcher engine. Think a 2.5m stack, the lower stage a Mainsail, the upper stage a Poodle. Sounds natural, doesn't it? Smart design to teach beginners how to do rockets. But no! I've went through much experimenting, and there is just not way to use for a poodle upper stage without wasting a bunch of money/weight. Kerbins circularization burns are just too short to support something with thrust that weak; and the Skipper is obviously too heavy and powerful for an upper stage. So a Wolfhound might finally be an engine that you can put above a 2.5m lifter stage and not feel silly. It's the J2-type engine, isn't it? Was 421 Isp in real life. Hard to truly balance without H2 and boiloff systems.
  15. Temeter
    I think it's fine; basically an early type of mission if you need personal or some quick funds. At least in my play's I naturally started to go for harder missions that earned more money and skipped stuff like low orbit rescue. Wasn't really a problem that you could potentially abuse the system by just rescuing one Kerbal after another and make a lot of easy money.
  16. Temeter
    Yep, looks interesting. Has the three kerbals sitting besides each other, closer to Apollo.
  17. Temeter
    Basically, the batteries shouldn't be empty, but rather in the same state you left them.
  18. Temeter
    And do you know at what time steam will update?
  19. Temeter
    This will make dealing with landers, external satellites etc a lot easier. Always felt a bit janky that you needed to rename stuff after undocking.
  20. Temeter
    Who is stealing your data and how? Tell me, where exactly do you give your name, adress, age, phone number, etc to Take 2 or Squad? Just don't give your personal data to them (they generally don't ask) and everything is fine. Yeah, that part bothers me a bit.
  21. Temeter
    You see, I actually wanted to go into another thread, so I clicked on most recent post, but accidently got this thread. Then I just see 'Naval' and someone complaining about ships shaking themselves apart, funnily enough a problem I just had delt with myself. So one thing leads to another
  22. Temeter
    I hereby officially decide not to ask Nertea for updates.
  23. Temeter
    Nvm lol, completely missed where this thread went xD
  24. Temeter
    ~
  25. Temeter
    I mean, from a bit of an outsider perspective... is that, in the end, really much of a problem? I mean, if Squad would stop updating the game, or at least slow down a lot? Felt to me for a while, as if KSP is slowing down the updates (they obviously still did important stuff like the Unity upgrade and some content). Seems like there is less dev time spent on KSP updates, or at least more devs rather working on the DLC at this point. Sure it's a very contentious matter if KSP is ever really 'done'; I honestly feel you could probably upgrade/develope the game for all eternity and it would still feel janky in a bunch of regards. From what you write, that seems even moreso true for modders who want to get the most out of the games functionality. But would that really be a dealbreaker if Squad just stopped or heavily slowed down updates?
×
×
  • Create New...