Jump to content

John FX

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,181

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by John FX

  1. John FX
    For me it increases the garbage collection rate and stutter as a result. Here is a screenshot where I press alt-end about 1/5 from the left side, then again after the same time. As you can see the green bars get lower and garbage collection happens more often. Win-7 24GB I7 - lots of mods. EDIT : I tried changing the value to 8192 and it works great now. I also noticed GC happens every time you screenshot. EDIT 2: A suggestion. Maybe have a couple of hotkeys for doubling and halving the padhead and another hotkey to store a value? 1024MB is great for some but for those of us with more memory it is counterproductive and increases GC. If hotkeys were in place it would make getting the right padhead easier, also if it was possible to store settings from the previous time then it would not need doing every time the game is launched.
  2. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    Or a true to life NASA simulator from the perspective of the pilot because the pilots don't fly the craft, the craft flies itself? No pilot has EVER launched a craft and guided it manually through ascent to orbit... Currently we have the VAB, which is the perspective of the engineer building the rocket and we have flying the craft which is the pilots perspective. It would round out the game well to have a decent managers perspective. Myself I bought the game because of the word `program`. If the game was called `kerbal spacecraft flying` I honestly do not think I would have jumped as quickly to buy. I wanted to manage a space program, not just fly the craft. Career just does not cut it, it is a series of unconnected tasks that distract from, rather than enhance the feeling of, running a space program.
  3. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    Welcome to the forum, have your first rep. I only heard of the game because of the fuss in 2013 about possibly paid DLC in the future (we now know that time is now) so I made sure I bought a copy (after trying the demo) because it seemed like a game I would play. I was right. If you had bought the game then, you may be in a similar position to me where the stock game, and this DLC, are behind the place where you have fun now, that place for me being RO/RSS/RP-0. If Squad ever do release a DLC with truly game changing features, like being able to choose between the Kerbal system or the Sol system then that would be worthy of the description `game-changing features` They are moving towards that with `historical missions` and the mission manager but IMHO the people who want to fly historical missions have a great interest in doing it in a full sized solar system... EDIT : That would be interesting. It would finally give a purpose to the stats Kerbals have, like stupidity etc. Those stats were a placeholder IIRC, the fact they remain in the released game with no purpose is rather shoddy IMHO.
  4. John FX
    Electrics as a whole could do with making more sense. Most missions I have either a single NUK or a couple of static panels. With a decent battery there isn`t much you can`t do. Stuff should need more power, batteries should be larger. I think I worked out once a 100EC battery was something like the equivalent of an AA battery, not very big at all. This may not be right, it`s from a poor memory.
  5. John FX
    I wasn`t saying it was actually based on that mod, or that the DLC was contract based, I know they are missions not contracts and as such will not work without the DLC, just that the features sound reproducible with either that mod or a mod that works in a similar way. Is there any real world difference between a mission to go to Mun, orbit, land, return, or a contract with the same goals? A rose by any other name... All I reckon is that, based on the current released information, the DLC seems reproducible with mods and does not really contain `major game-changing sets of features`. This opinion could change in the future when more information comes out about the DLC of course. To quote Squad, four years ago (almost exactly). "So this is what we mean when we say Expansion Packs for KSP. We’re not talking about small content bundles, we’re talking about major game-changing sets of features, like Multiplayer, or Colonization." Naturally if it is much more than the currently available information suggests and no existing mod currently reproduces the `major game-changing sets of features`, or be easily adjusted to do so then I will gladly be wrong, it would be better than being right. I will await the next exciting release of information which will surely elaborate on this.
  6. John FX
    Ah, I see. Not that then. If there is not a way for the engines to create unstable spin, the spin is stable to begin with and then becomes unstable, then it might be some sort of weird effect caused by fuel drain changing COM.
  7. John FX
    If you mean this one then I have had trouble with multiple aerobees on a single stage where one engine runs out of burn time before the others, leading to instability. Are you watching the TestFlight window during your burn to see if any engines fail early?
  8. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    The end of april 13, before may 1 2013. In my case it matters because I bought mid april because of the promise.
  9. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    Of course.
  10. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    How about the people who were promised they would never have to pay for DLC do not have to pay and the people who were never told they would get free DLC don`t get free DLC?
  11. John FX
    So I just read the promise about free expansions if you bought before the end of april 13 and noticed this And it made me consider the making history expansion. I`m a bit on the fence as to whether a mission editor is enough to rate as a "major game-changing sets of features" although it can be said it is more than a "small content bundle".
  12. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    Then we will have two levels of `stock`. One with and one without the DLC. I am genuinely curious which side of the fence `stock purists` will fall on. Will the DLC be regarded by them as a mod or not?
  13. John FX
    Sorry but that`s not how it works. I was promised I would never have to pay for DLC and Squad are honouring that.
  14. John FX

    KSP Making History

    John FX replied to UomoCapra's topic in 2017

    It also seems AFAIK that the missions you make in it can`t be shared with people who do not have the DLC.
  15. John FX
    Very quickly in my case. I seriously overbuilt my first rocket (thinking I had to build to Earth sizes) so I was in orbit within half an hour and I landed on all the bodies within a month to do the `grandmaster challenge` and only afterwards realised that it was supposed to be really hard and that doing so was essentially all there was to do in the game, which if I knew before I would have stretched out the exploration. Now I am going through the same learning process in RSS/RO/RP-0 I am taking more time and enjoying the journey.
  16. John FX
    I predicted this situation many years ago when I heard there was uproar on the forums about possible paid DLC and Squad promised that if you bought before a certain date you would never have to pay for any DLC, update or expansion so I bought then knowing it would pay off later down the road. It would appear we are now further down the road from that point. Looks like the DLC is basically only contract configurator or your favourite contract editor with historic missions (mission manager 2?) and a few parts, one being a rather nice LEM pod and the rest fleshing out gaps in the tree with 1.875m parts. Like you say, easily reproduced with mods for free.
  17. John FX
    Whilst music is being looked at, maybe use tunes that don`t sound like The Sims or which are publicly available royalty free from Incompetech...
  18. John FX
    I`ve not done much at all with asteroids, they were quite buggy (well the claw was) when they first came out and so I just didn`t ever go there.
  19. John FX
    Normally it is custom that the person setting a challenge shows their attempt and the craft they tried it in. Also you have not stated the rules of your challenge, are mods allowed for example? Is there a time limit? How will entries be scored? and so on. Pictures help too. Have a look here then maybe edit your post?
  20. John FX
    This is how I feel. Of course it would be great if we are wrong. This is why I have pushed in the forum for people to see that the best thing we can hope for now is a better way for mods to interact with the game, by opening up things which are still hardcoded or invisible to mods. A game that is more easily modded is a game with more life, and @SQUAD, that means more sales later on as people see there is life in the old dog yet. Through mods. Most games which can be modded go through the stages of, active in house development, opening up the game to modding, development slows down, and then mod makers keep interest in the game alive and provide a long tail for sales. So, to keep with the spirit of the thread, although my hope is for 1.4, I would like the API to be more open for modders and bugfixing. I dare not hope for more.
  21. John FX
    Although it has been said the localisation pack is 1.3 so maybe start a `what will be in 1.4?` thread? EDIT : It`s the thread that keeps on giving.
  22. John FX
    Oh well then. I see this has been covered already. Thanks for the links, I`ll give them a go Still a rather interesting video about post WW2 mobile nuclear reactor development and the cold war.
  23. John FX
    My initial answer is `it depends`. If `modpacks` are a zip file which is a repacked collection of other mods then I would say ban them. If they are something more like Realism Overhaul where a set of mods is referenced in CKAN and the current mods are installed as a bunch then that is something good. I will assume a `modpack` is just a mod repackaged in a zip file and so I voted to ban. To my mind exactly this problem is why we have Module Manager which non-destructively does very good things. The solution for modpacks is to not use a ZIP but a CKAN file. Then YouTubers can still say `download this modset` and avoid the obvious problems of outdated mods etc. If people then want to add a .cfg file, instead of repacking the whole mod they should just supply a `mod` which is just a MM file for the mod installed with CKAN.
  24. John FX
    Found this video on Youtube about plans in the 50`s for a Nuclear Jet Powered Bomber. It`s around 45 minutes. It seems like a semi-realistic (as in based on real world development, like the NERVA) way to get a jet engine on a planet with no oxygen which will not be too overpowered even though it would not run out of fuel for months. It appears they would be very heavy (80T) and not have a great amount of thrust for the weight although in the documentary they mention that modern tech would make the engine lighter and much more useable. I would imagine they may well be not suitable for Duna. My opinion is that if you can ship 1 or 2 80T engines to a planet you deserve to be able to use them. I just wondered if anyone with more ability would be interested in making such a part? The real world design had a nuclear reactor in the main hold that powered two engines but that may be too complex for KSP.
  25. John FX
    This thread is hilarious.
×
×
  • Create New...