Jump to content

GoldForest

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,585

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by GoldForest

  1. GoldForest
    Understandable. Again, I doubt the devs will do much with modular towers. What we see, is what we might just be getting. I don't see them wasting time or money putting more features into the stock tower, since for one, it's a static prop, and two, MLA exists for KSP 1 and will no doubt be adopted by someone for KSP 2. MLA 2 will have much more user base anyway, since it will include not only custom towers, but historical replicas of other towers, such as the Saturn V.
  2. GoldForest
    Don't sell yourself short, I'm sure you'll do fine.
  3. GoldForest
    I doubt we'll see anything this elaborate from Intercept Games. If anything, we'll have to see if @AlphaMensae Will make MPL 2, or someone else to make it.
  4. GoldForest
    Ah yes, sitting in an external command seat, strapped to a Daedalus engine... exposed to all the interstellar material and meteors and micrometeorites. I'm sure Jeb and the others will love that.
  5. GoldForest
    Ah, sorry. Mmm, that would be nice as a difficulty option, yeah. As for staying in a plane the entire time, yes, ridiculous, hence the other option, a automated hauler transporter. Also, I don't doubt people will do that exact thing, sticking Kerbals into a plane and sending it across the galaxy with no creature comforts. Hell, we'll see people send kerbals to Nebneb in the mk 1 command pod. All alone. Just the mk 1 command pod, no other spaces.
  6. GoldForest
    Realistically, this will be up to you to connect all habitat parts. Procedurally done tubes between modules will be a little bothersome, as a tube might end up going through an area that's it's not supposed to, I.e., a tube moving outside the structural tubes in the spaceplane shot. As for the how crew get to the planes, they either A) are stored away on the planes already or B) This is a droned cargo transport interstellar ship and there is no crew, so no need for tubes to the planes. I imagine this is a cargo transporter intended to arrive before crewed interstellar ship. When the kerbals arrive, they eva over to the spaceplanes and use them.
  7. GoldForest
    There's already a checklist feature in KSP 1. It's the Engineer's Report button at the bottom right. It won't push an alert, but it does tell you if you are missing something or don't have enough of something like solar panels to make enough EC to run the craft. The 'engineering method' includes checklists you know?
  8. GoldForest
    "Paper work", "Regulatory evaluations" I came to run a space program, not an administration program. But since KSP 2 will expand moddability, I have no doubt someone will make a mod to where you have to sign and initial paperwork for everything.
  9. GoldForest
    Yes, but again, the 2d image would not know what is a lander, what is a spaceplane, what is an interstellar craft, etcetera. Not unless there was some way to mark that. But still, this system is just a waste of time and effort imo. On top of that, I see it being a pain to code, and it would just delay KSP 2 even more from official release. We don't really know how the assembly/sub-assembly system will work. We've been given tid bits here and there, but we don't know the whole picture. All we know is that there's the main assembly and sub-assemblies in the same workspace. We don't know if the sub-assemblies go with you when you go to launch, if they get deleted when you go to launch, etcetera. Calling the sub-assemblies 'separate entities' kind of implies the former. Which in truth would be kind of neat, being able to make three different planes or rockets and launch all of them at once, but I doubt that's how it works. Unless you mean it will treat two spaceplanes docked to an interstellar craft as 3 separate entities, then no. It will treat them as one giant entity since the crafts are docked.
  10. GoldForest
    The entire craft in the VAB, yes, but you're asking it to break your craft down, and know what stage is supposed to do what, which I don't see happening. Too many different ways the computer can read your craft and display all the wrong images. It could display a lunar lander as the csm. And how is it supposed to tell a spacesplane docked to an interstellar craft apart from said interstellar craft? What you're asking for is almost impossible without some major work, work better suited in other areas of development. Best you'll get is a pre-made 2D image, and not a procedurally generated one.
  11. GoldForest
    I see no value or benefit in a system designed to generate 2D images for your journey. It's a waste of time and resources imo. Now, I understand that it can be a visual aid to some, but to create a system that will read your craft file, then show it at every stage of your journey is frankly ridiculous to me. If something like that was to be added to the game, I would like to see it as pre-made 2d images stored in the tutorial or KSPedia section, so it's not taking up processing power and and I don't have to sit around waiting for it to generate the image. Being pre-made means you won't see your exact ship, but it doesn't take up processing power, so is the best thing.
  12. GoldForest
    So, you want ksp2 to procedurally plan, render and display an image of your mission? Yeah, I don't think that's possible in game at all.
  13. GoldForest
    I don't think the journey planner will look anything like those images. It will be in the map view and be either 1 of 2 things in my opinion: A) It will preplan multiple maneuver nodes in one of three settings: Most efficient, Quickest Arrival Time or Mix of the two. It will then automatically place those nodes where you need to perform the maneuver. B) I suspect it will be a way to put in multiple maneuver nodes at once and see how all of them affect each other. So, let's say you planned out a journey from Kerbin to Jool, taking a somewhat direct route. You plan it out. Then you see that Duna will be in a close position to slingshot to save some Dv or make the trip a little faster at the expense of a little Dv. You move your Kerbin TJI maneuver node to make it a TDI maneuver node. You can then adjust your other nodes based off the new information. As far as a 'replay my mission route' kind of time-lapse replay, seems something that a mod should do, as I don't think there's much interest in seeing your journey from destination A to B in time-lapse form. I could be wrong of course, but personally, I don't see much use in a time-lapse replay mod for KSP. If you want to rewatch your journey, record it yourself.
  14. GoldForest
    We should not settle for anything less than a full list of features and changes from KSP 1. And we should get it now. /This was a joke Anyway, joking aside, I think a show and tell showing off the feature would be nice. @Nate Simpson Could we see the journey planner in action?
  15. GoldForest
    "Provisions" or "Supplies" doesn't really fit the kerbal nature though. "Snacks" are ingrained in Kerbal culture. It's been a meme of the game since the early days. Calling life support 'snacks' would be paying homage really. And it's easy for the younger people to understand.
  16. GoldForest
    It's simple. (Distance to KSC or nearest science processing colony/station in meters) / (speed of light in m/s) = (Time it takes for Science to arrive)
  17. GoldForest
    I'm not advocating for breaking the laws that govern light, just transmission delay.
  18. GoldForest
    I imagine that colonies can serve to recieve and process science, so if you setup a science colony on Eeloo, or put orbital colonies outside of Eeloo in an evenly spread-out fashion, then the science would go to them and take maybe a year instead of four. I think it would be kind of nice to have delayed science, making it to where you have to plan out your career path more carefully instead of going, "Yay, science, unlock all the nodes now!"
  19. GoldForest
    Not fun for new players or players who don't want to program their probe to do a course correction and hope it goes well. If people want command and control lag, then leave it as a default off option in the difficulty settings.
  20. GoldForest
    Life support has been asked about before, and Nate has always said "No comment." to the questions, so there's a high chance that life support will be in game in some form or fashion, though, imo, it shouldn't be added and left to modders, and if it is added should be VERY basic. I.e. just 'snacks' and possibly oxygen. Even then, an option to turn off life support altogether would be nice. Life support might come with the Colonies update, Interstellar update or the Exploration Update. Or it might even be further down the roadmap. As I have pointed out in other threads, the roadmap does not end at multiplayer, it simply shows up to multiplayer. We can clearly see an unknown roadmap... er... tab? Section? ... er... for lack of better word, 'tab' will be used. Anyway, yeah. We see up to the multiplayer tab, and then a tab right after that which is cutoff. There's a lot more we are not seeing. We'll have to wait and see roadmap part 2 to see.
  21. GoldForest
    The engines in game won't be for interstellar travel. They'll be for fast and/or efficient interplanetary travel inside a solar system, so no need for any temporary planets or planetoids. For example, It takes many months to get from Kerbin to Duna with current engines in KSP 1. Metallic hydrogen engines will probably cut that time down to a few months. It takes over a year to get to Jool. Again, MH would get you there in the time it takes to get to Duna with conventional engines.
  22. GoldForest
    True
  23. GoldForest
    So, the void created by the entry/reentry shockwave is meant to protect the entire ship?
  24. GoldForest
    If we're allowed to get below the upper cloud layer, probably really dark. I would like to hear thunder and see lightning though, if possible.
  25. GoldForest
    Can't really tell what's under the second rad shield, but I'm not sure that's it. I think those might be RCS fuel tanks in front of the secondary rad shield. They're too small to be fuel tanks to be honest for a craft of that size (Talking about everything in front of the secondary rad shield.) You also have no RCS thrusters on the front of the craft, so either the planes would be needed to maneuver the 'second stage' as you put it, or it's something else.
×
×
  • Create New...