Jump to content

r4pt0r

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,628

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by r4pt0r

  1. r4pt0r
    Which mod runs the Kerbal facebook page? they made a 420 joke and I've received infractions for less here lol.
  2. r4pt0r
    Really? You really can't believe that they would drop the ball here?
  3. r4pt0r
    Old thread, but still relevant and not outdated. Anything coming down the pipe? I dont like how unrefined using the mk2 to 1.25 adapter with a standard rocket nose looks.
  4. r4pt0r
    It's been some time since I last used rovers, and I see an update completely changed how wheels work. No longer can one physics warp x4 to make trip to another biome a bit speedier. Doing so results in heinous bouncing and eventual explosions. Does anyone have any idea how to reduce that? Is it a spring or dampener setting? Maybe someone has a reliable design that is immune to that? I didn't mind 15 minute drives, but without warp that is an hour long boring ride into the next biome...
  5. r4pt0r
    Shame. Thanks for the leg work, Ive been out of the loop for a half year and only recently started checking in.
  6. r4pt0r
    Was there not talk of "something big" coming for either 1.2.9, or 1.3? Since the DLC is a separate purchase from the update, aren't we still in the dark about some big feature for the base game?
  7. r4pt0r
    @Veeltch to be fair, I dont think proc craters is too important. I have a base on ike and if an update puts my craft underground and I lose it because the new proc craters changed the terrain, i'd be salty. But yes, the arbitrary jump to 1.0 was not something I was a fan of.
  8. r4pt0r
    Are we still expecting "something big" tomorrow? or was that not included in prerelease but will be in the full update release?
  9. r4pt0r
    So I have been playing again recently, and I remembered an old qualm I had with the game that could be fixed. Just a little quality of life thing I would love to see added. It would be particularly lovely when planning precise aerobreaking while still in interplanetary travel. Open to more ideas as well.
  10. r4pt0r

    Hope you are doing well, been a long time.

  11. r4pt0r

    Hello!

    1. worir4

      worir4

      Hi. How are you doing?

  12. r4pt0r
    I've returned at a good time then?
  13. r4pt0r
    So hey, long time no see all. I have tried to catch up a bit, I see devnotes are no longer a thing, and my google-fu is not strong it seems as I cannot find concrete info on how the part and kerbal G-force limits, pressure limits, and the plasma blackout will affect gameplay. I understand what those are, but I'm wondering if there was a large FAQ page somewhere detailing the numerical limits, things of that nature. Thanks, and hello again. Seems Im back in time for some big mystery feature in 2 weeks, neato. I presume it will fit into existing saves, so I'll start playing a new game once I get these rules sorted out.
  14. r4pt0r
    Your account may be many months old, but for this post to be your very first is suspect as hell. Im onto your games Squad.
  15. r4pt0r
    I....Im ok with this. Gives more use to the G-meter too. As long as its more comical than gross. tourists cant EVA, so they only sit inside with helmets off, so perhaps an animation where they whip out a barf-bag?
  16. r4pt0r
    A warning would be nice for somethings. Say I have a highly eliptical probe at Duna, and then I switch to a Jool mission. Every so often, Ike might pass into the path of my eliptical orbiting probe, and either throw it off course, or destroy it. Had it happen to me before.
  17. r4pt0r
    I would note that poll results are not proof of any player sentiment, there are many people on steam, Reddit, consoles, ect, that never visit the forums.
  18. r4pt0r
    While I see your point, I would make them not "turnoffable". No locks. If a kerbal is on board a craft, snacks must be slowly drained. as far as EVA kerbals, I think they should last a week outside of a craft. they carry reserves pulled from their command module. This is important because when they enter a craft, they deposit their snacks. Those snacks can be used to "wake up" any sleepers onboard. Additonaly, EVA kerbals out of snacks go ragdoll in space, but can be resupplied by any kerbal within 5m with a right click "give snacks". "Give snacks" gives 25% of a kerbals bar back, and removes 25 from the donor supply. on the ground a hungry kerbal might just sit and look at the stars until given snacks. All that can be tweaked of course, but thats how i would envision it.
  19. r4pt0r
    Oh dont sound so suprised now. I am a fountain of good ideas
  20. r4pt0r
    Our little cartoon green people are funny, their heads are too big and they fall over and ragdoll. they poof upon death as well. I dont think that suffocation or starvation fits the theme of the game. I dont think running out of snacks or supplies should ever result in death in the base game. I think it would best be implemented by making their ships unresponsive, and showing them sleeping/snoring, or hungry with growling stomachs. they refuse to work on an empty stomach is a good fun fluff for the setting.
  21. r4pt0r
    We have the notification system @Red Iron Crown, could you do anything like this? "It has been 3 days since you asked _____, please change thread to answered if you recieved the help you needed." "Posting error: You have 2 question threads currently open. please mark them as answered before posting another question"
  22. r4pt0r
    Voting for the 3rd option is not a wasted vote I think most of the "against" group can be broken down these main ways: -I dont want to waste time on boring station resupply missions that are just rendezvous and repeat over and over. -I dont want my kerbals at X to die, because I just spent a 3 years timewarping and returning a different mission from Y (I start and finish my missions in 1 sitting, and that may take over 2+ years in warp). -This game is already hard, dont make it harder please. All perfectly valid complaints, any other reasons?
  23. r4pt0r
    I would like a simple system myself. Just "snacks". A few holding tanks, probably similar to the the rcs tanks. Kerbals are not humans, so starvation results in "sleeping/hibernating" and can be rescued no matter what. "Snacks" can be generated over time with electricity and a greenhouse module, similar in size to either the 2 person lab, or hitchhiker. Command modules have enough snacks for 4 weeks. That would be my ideal default. Casual enough to still appeal to the broad ksp audience. Could be made harder with settings, or mods.
  24. r4pt0r
    I don't like it. I stack contracts so my "put satellite in specific orbit of laythe" contract will also be heading to orbit another body for another contract, or it might be a unmanned return probe for a "scientific data from pol surface". Whatever my secondary objectives are, they will undoubtedly add more mass to my craft. If I have to do separate missions for all those because of some arbitrary limit it quickly becomes uneconomical. I would say add it as a new separate type of contract, but I already decline dozens of contracts looking for ones I actually want my space program to do and I would not want more un-fun ones to shuffle past.
  25. r4pt0r
    This is something that really could use a touch of refinement. I always have this issue, and as recently as last night. It should be much easier to put a node on the blue line even when the purple is right there.
×
×
  • Create New...