|
Nice. Im gonna play around with it tonight. I may combine ideas and put seperatrons on there and then get high enough nothing deorbits. 4 launches would ultimately be better i guess. I generally have a couple of science and sat contracts up early on anyways and if i shoot the swarm opposite those the net would be usuable pretty quick. Plus i always use scansat so ive got polar orbits with relays up pretty early on too.
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
What if you put a bunch of reaction wheels on the mothership and spin it up really fast when you decouple the relays?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:What if you put a bunch of reaction wheels on the mothership and spin it up really fast when you decouple the relays? Yeah this, and if you don't mind launching it without a fairing, give the mounting points some length so you get better speed on the release.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:What if you put a bunch of reaction wheels on the mothership and spin it up really fast when you decouple the relays? You can do that but it tends to get wobbly if you want to launch them one at a time. Also I don't trust KSP and angular velocity, especially during separation. I suspect what you will mostly get is a space explosion machine.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:space explosion machine I'm not seeing the problem.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
Okay guys, I tested out my suggestion with the USS Good Idea which is appropriately shaped like a light bulb. After settling into a 250km orbit, I hit the rotation engines and deployed the cloud of 24 relay sats all at once.     A couple of quick loads and different trials later and I can fling these all the way out to 1400km (while burning half up in the atmosphere).   Conclusion: Relay network deployment method: 4/10 Space-based spin-art creator: 7/10
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:Okay guys, I tested out my suggestion with the USS Good Idea which is appropriately shaped like a light bulb. We’ll have a dozen. 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
Lol thats rad as hell.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 03:45
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:Okay guys, I tested out my suggestion with the USS Good Idea which is appropriately shaped like a light bulb. For safety's sake you ought to have a flared base.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
What's the point of fairings anyways? I don't think I've ever bothered with them.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Certain save game styles (namely ones with career progression and/or many mods) put you in a situation where fairings are cheaper/easier/more reliable than doing whatever it is you need to do to get to orbit without them.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
Fairings make rockets look good and fly good.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
Gorelab posted:What's the point of fairings anyways? I don't think I've ever bothered with them. They reduce drag. Which is not important for fuel savings because its like 1% or something. But it can be a huge deal for rocket stability, especially if you have a weird shaped payload.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
I miss launching entire space stations at once without fairings and with a billion asparagus boosters and struts.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
Ill be honest my farings are based around what will look cool on fire. The new effects own.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:Okay guys, I tested out my suggestion with the USS Good Idea which is appropriately shaped like a light bulb. More like USS Where No Man Has Gone Before 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 05:05
|
|
|
When people send maiden voyages to other planets do you generally budget delta-V for the return trip to Kerbin or just rename -> station and call it a success?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Sir Edmund Hillary posted:If you climb a mountain for the first time and die on the descent, is it really a complete first ascent of the mountain? I am rather inclined to think personally that maybe it is quite important, the getting down, and the complete climb of a mountain is reaching the summit and getting safely to the bottom again.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
I like to think that every KSPer's first manned Eve landing turns into a permanent Eve colony.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
Otacon posted:I like to think that every KSPer's first manned Eve landing turns into a permanent Eve colony. I think with mine, Bill had some technical difficulties. I sent a new return vehicle which actually landed safely, but ~1/4 the way to the other side of the planet. Spent a while running at 4x speed, and realized it would take far too long to walk there. I installed a mod with a crazy rover, landed that much closer. The drive would have only take a handful of play sessions. On the third day, after checking something else at KSC, I come back to Bill's chariot only to find it empty.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:I'm not seeing the problem. Not reknowned for its ability to relay signals. At least, not repeatably.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
xanif posted:When people send maiden voyages to other planets do you generally budget delta-V for the return trip to Kerbin or just rename -> station and call it a success? I prefer to send unmanned probes out first. They'll scout it, SCANsat map the place, attempt a sort of crash landing and generally see whats up. Once I have an idea of what I'm getting into some Kerbals will follow, and yes they're expected to return home.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 14:45
|
|
|
One use I find for rovers is to launch them more or less where you want to land, and then drive them to an actually flat, level spot and use them as a guidance beacon. Helps a lot to land your real rockets.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
Procedural fairings still the best tho
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:One use I find for rovers is to launch them more or less where you want to land, and then drive them to an actually flat, level spot and use them as a guidance beacon. Helps a lot to land your real rockets. And if you happen to land near the rover you can get some bonus science like Surveyor 3
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
Truga posted:Procedural fairings still the best tho what have you got in there?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
it was a crane. url because 4mb png https://udba.org/ksp/screenshot178.png
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
Truga posted:it was a crane. url because 4mb png https://udba.org/ksp/screenshot178.png badass
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
Truga posted:it was a crane. url because 4mb png https://udba.org/ksp/screenshot178.png lol, don't go to the blessed images thread it is littered with 70+MB gifs
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
I had a bunch of Tourism Plus contracts to bring 3-4 tourists at a time into space, over various sights, etc, and I didn't really have anything that could lift 5 Kerbals at once. I decided to make a small shuttle - all Mk1 parts, small payload capacity, intended for short jaunts to low orbit and back. Unlike the real-life Space Shuttle, this one's belly-mounted fuel tank has an engine mounted on it. It's also a lot smaller, relative to its boosters, than the Shuttle is.  It's a little difficult to control, you have to make heavy use of the thrust limiter to keep it stable once you've ditched the boosters and even then you'll have to actively fight it to keep it on-node during orbital insertion. You can't really see them from this angle but the boosters have four giant wings mounted on them to keep the whole thing from flipping end-over-end in the lower atmosphere; with those, it's actually pretty easy to control during launch, and doesn't really start to run into difficulties until the boosters are ditched.  The small monopropellant tank gives it plenty of RCS fuel for these short missions - and you'll be making use of it, especially on the orbital insertion burn; the SAS alone just can't keep up with the imbalanced thrust.  There's no power generation except the alternators, and no additional life support storage, but there are batteries concealed in the cargo bay which gives it just about three Kerbin-Days worth of battery life, more than sufficient for any mission it will ever be flying.  So long as you set up the fuel feed priority correctly, the belly tank should drain first even if you're firing the engine on the spaceplane. If your ascent profile was good, you should reach orbit with a full tank, giving you just over 1000m/s of delta-v for orbital maneuvers, deorbiting, and landing.    The cargo bay is small but has enough room for some KIS containers or a very small satellite. In the future I plan to send science experiments in the cargo bay up with my tourism contracts, and then have a Kerbal on EVA install and perform the experiments so I can get a bit of science out of the contract flights.     There's no parachutes, but it's very aerodynamically stable, once you get into thicker atmosphere it's trivially easy to get it flying straight-and-level and glide down to the ground. If you budgeted your fuel well there should also be some in the tank to let you land under engine power.  I swear to god I've landed this thing safely in one piece before, but sometimes it just doesn't work out.  This whole thing is surprisingly expensive, but I'm using StageRecovery and parachutes to reuse my SRBs, so under ideal conditions the only things I lose are the belly tank and the engine mounted to it. Allows for some pretty profitable tourist flights.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
Nice. Might be more stable with the belly tank mounted really high.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
drat my friend for getting me interested in this game. I've spent every spare moment for 3 weeks so far playing this thing. What I've learned so far, Mechjeb rules but can be quirky, seriously this functionality should be in the games core mechanics. Make sure you have some cushion built into your fuel loads for a Mun landing (My first lander got stuck unable to make it back to mun orbital station probably don't need that station 190km up either. Also landers need a wide base to land on Mun and shouldn't be to heavy, part of why the lander doesn't have enough fuel to get back to the station is because it took extra fuel to land due to having to find a really flat spot to settle on. Check to make sure your hatch isn't obstructed. So with Jeb and crew stuck on the Mun a rescue mission was necessary. Designed and built a new wider heavier duty lander in order to rescue the stranded Kerbonauts, mission went relatively smoothly. Only took a few tries to work out the launch to orbit, Flew to Mun, rendezvous with Mun station top off internal tanks then switched to the stranded pod got it into a circularized 10k orbit with a fumes to spare. Switch back to the Mk 2 lander, detach from the station, switch to the tracking station to get back into the correct ship, perform rendezvous with the Mk1 lander, topped off its tanks sent it to Mun station then since the new lander had plenty of DV remaining even after topping off the fuel tanks of the Mk1 lander, I landed it in the far-side crater (so much easier to land something with a broad footprint) performed initial science went to have scientist on mission reset tests, store data, plant flag and take surface samples and "Hatch obstructed". Didn't really want to lose all the effort and time invested in getting that ship to Mun so did a little research found out about KAS/KIS which provided a method for dealing with the issue. Which lead me to CKAN which lead to 61 mods installed which lead to my computer having trouble running the game which has lead me to contemplating whether or not I can convince my wife that I need a new laptop with an I7 processor and discrete video so I can plat the game well and in bed while we're watching TV. Flew the Mk2 back to the Munstation and attempted an EVA repair after installing the mods only to find that since I didn't install KIS/KAS prior to the mission my engineers lack the tools to do the job. That's fine I was planning another trip anyway which brings me to the wasted 3 days of my holiday. After realizing that my Mk2 mun lander had an obstructed hatch I decide to build the next phase of my space program. The Space Truck. The idea behind the space truck is a long haul fuel efficient hauler to tow packages (Fuel and passengers) around Kerbin's inner system (Kerbin, Mun and Minmus). The design was an outrigger system with a the new 5 capacity pod at it's core, some basic science drone core and other sundries in a service bay, added additional passenger capacity. From that central core I using fuel tanks I used a 6 way joint, resized to 2.5m, up side to capsule, lower to a large docking port (medium dock in nose of capsule) a large rocko tank on each spine to my "nacelles" another 6x joint resized to 2.5m form the elbow to the outriggers a stack of mono tanks and another large rocko tank and some band adapters to bring things down to the right size to hook up with the NERVs. Then I get a wild hair and think, "hey maybe this thing can land and take off of the Mun and Minmus?" not quite enough DV with the nukes for Mun so I decide to drop 4 thuds on each nancelle giving it sufficient thrust to launch from the Mun. Of course a ship that can land needs legs so I put legs on it and think "hmm can I resize those too?" couple clicks later and I have huge lander legs on my space truck. Go through my mental check list, electrical check. install solar check, oh need to be able to get to the surface so build long set of retractable and fixed ladders to crawl out on the outriggers and down to the ground. The plan was to be able to back up to a package that would fit inside the space between the nancelles thus keeping the COM in front of the engines. Upto and including bases for the Mun and Minmus that the truck could deliver (by building them underneath the truck prior to launch. Couple up using the docking port them drag it around to wherever it needs to be. Eventually Space Truck Mk 1 is complete, now to see about getting this behemoth into orbit. I start with trying to lift it from it's center with a stack and my outriggers dangling. After stacking enough engines and fuel under it to get it off the launch pad and theoretically into orbit and beyond, I go to the launch pad engage auto-ascent and... doesn't even lift off the platform. Back to the hanger, add moar boost in the form of quad packs of the largest solid boosters on radial decouplers around the base of the rocket. Attempt launch again, fail, tweak repeat, multiple times getting the thrust not only sufficient but balanced enough. finally it starts to ascend all seems to be going relatively well but then one of the nancelles drop off when the solid boosters are dropped. Several tries to tweak that all ended up the craft disassembling itself during launch. Major rethink and redesign and many many failures later finally get it beefed enough to stay together and almost make orbit. This one was a fun launch for the first time I really noticed the expressions on the Kerbals' faces. The launch was going well up until about 30km that's when I noticed that the apoapsis isn't going up enough, in fact it's starting to fall. Look at Kerbals they all seem calm except for the scientist who's starting to look a little concerned. Space truck and it's associated launch assembly still has plenty of fuel and even some control surfaces, I think to self, "self let's spaceplane this turkey" so I orient it so that the lift surfaces are at the correct angle and give it a try. Doesn't go well at all, I have pictures and maybe someday I'll get them up somewhere but I can see the Kerbals start to look more and more concerned right up to the point where the ship starts to break into pieces and it's occurred to them that there aren't any escape pods or parachutes. More adjustments to the craft and a tweak to the ascent profile plus significant manual muscling (MechJeb kept trying to fly it into the ground) I manage to get it into a circularized orbit with most of it's own fuel still in tact. Not much of a fuel truck if it's not hauling any fuel. The plan was a modular craft capable of moving more or less standardized packages. I set about designing and launching a fuel package, much harder and expensive to get into orbit that I had originally thought it would be. Many trials and failures later I get it into a stable orbit. Time to hook up to it. I attempt rendezvous learn that the Space Truck has a design flaw, The extra motors (Thuds) overheat after a period of use and explode spectacularly. Fortunately they don't damage the craft but it definitely throws off maneuvering. Don't want to revert all the way back to launching that thing so I manage to find a sweet spot where if I thrust limit those engines to 80% they don't overheat. Eventually after several failed attempts (and most of my mono) I get everything hooked up and ready to fly to the mun. plot course and off we go. at first I attempt the burn with just the nukes but the burn time was longer than the fuel capacity, so I use the thuds and the math works. Kicker though is that I didn't realize that cross feed was enabled on my docking ports so it was using my fuel package for the flight and while eventually I did get it to Mun orbit a significant portion of my fuel package was exhausted. By this time I'd also noticed that the handling was severely jenky and jerky likely due to the flexing of the nancelles. At this point I've burned the vast majority of my 3 day weekend and the Space Truck concept is a failure so I decide to abandon that path for now. Looking through my saves I fail to find one that was post rescue and pre-space truck so I grab a save from pre-rescue thinking I'll just design the damned lander right the first time. Which should have been a really quick thing right? Load up the mk 2 lander re-position the light that's blocking the hatch and go, except that I can never do anything the easy way, I've now seen that 5 man capsule and I have all this new science from the mods I added. At first I just try replacing the capsule, however there is also this 6 tourist mission to the mun and a lot of new science options that came with the mods. So back the drawing board. New bigger more capable Mk3 lander. This one is a serious behemoth. Center core is the 5 man capsule, reaction wheel, double 2.5 service bays, hitchhiker cabin, a couple bits who's names I don't recall from the mods but one is for EVA inventory and the other is a fuel/mono compartment with additional storage. every scientific gadget that fits and I can think to add. a couple more fuel adapters choking down to a claw at the the bottom (thinking that it can be used to connect up to salvage and other stuff. Then 4 way symmetry around that central module I place a stack of rocket and mono tanks. Then another set of tanks in 4 way symmetry off the first set, including the big Rocko tanks, mono tanks and assorted band adapters to taper things down nicely to engines and over sized landing gear , ladders down center from command module passing bays to interact with science compartments, added communications, electrics/solar other sundries including EVA tools and supplies. Now to lift the giant thing, I'm getting pretty adept at putting huge contraptions into orbit, but this one gives me serious headaches. For some reason Mechjeb keeps trying to go up at this weird northeast heading rather than east. Over and over I try to tweak things to the point where it will work right, Spent pretty much all of Monday trying to get this to work. Learned a bunch of valuable things in the process) one those thuds got scrapped, ended up using bigger engines for the main nancelles and stuck 4x terriers on the inner stacks as well for a little additional oomph. Fixed my RCS and adjusted my launch motors again then after the game crashed over night this time Mechjeb followed the correct eastern path (more or less) for some reason it still really wanted to point it at the ground starting around 30k so I ended up having to force it into orbit. This time rather than circularize I decide to take advantage of the remaining fuel in my second stage and plotted a course to the mun. plan and execute that node, however my mid stage runs out of fuel part way through the burn and things get a little haywire when I decouple due to me screwing up the staging on my final engines so while it dropped the old engines it failed to ignite the new. Fired off last stage and ended up short of the target. Planned new node to fix my intercept of the mun and flatten out my inclination. Then a maneuver to get into orbit and a final to circularize at around 40k before heading to work. Will repeat my previous mission to rescue my stranded crew then land the beast on the Mun (have some tourists paying to land anyway) and do some more science. Then I'm back to figuring out the answer to the fuel problem. Long term I'm going to need a fuel depot either on the mun or minmus as trying to get that crap out of Kerbin's gravity well, well isn't cheap or easy. That said I still need a way to transport it around the system so I'm going to have to come up with something that can haul a big fuel package to the Mun. The good news is that I have a package that I can get into orbit already designed. The trick is designing something that can move it to the mun and get it docked. Looks like I still need some sort of space tractor I'll just have to figure out a better way to build it. I should have taken the lack of any indications that anyone else had tried my plan as a sign that there was probably some fundamental flaw in the idea. I'm still not certain what that flaw is. My thinking is that I just need to figure out a way to make it more rigid, and solve the fuel efficiency problem. Then again maybe the idea just isn't workable. maybe a pusher is what's required that or maybe a 2 part system that can attach to the front and back of the package. Perhaps I need to be looking more at the space plane parts to get a functioning design. Or it could be that I was trying to make it do too much. and needs to be stripped down to the bare minimum and just be a space tug. Or maybe it's a dumb idea that I should just drop?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Skex posted:Switch back to the Mk 2 lander, detach from the station, switch to the tracking station to get back into the correct ship Use [ or ] to switch control between crafts/kerbals if they are within range, or if out of range switch to map view (M) and click the craft you want - you'll have an option for setting it as a target or switching to the craft Skex posted:Which lead me to CKAN which lead to 61 mods installed which lead to my computer having trouble running the game which has lead me to contemplating whether or not I can convince my wife that I need a new laptop with an I7 processor and discrete video so I can plat the game well and in bed while we're watching TV.  Skex posted:Long term I'm going to need a fuel depot either on the mun or minmus as trying to get that crap out of Kerbin's gravity well, well isn't cheap or easy. That said I still need a way to transport it around the system so I'm going to have to come up with something that can haul a big fuel package to the Mun. The good news is that I have a package that I can get into orbit already designed. The trick is designing something that can move it to the mun and get it docked. Looks like I still need some sort of space tractor I'll just have to figure out a better way to build it. Minmus is definitely the better option for a refuel station - I've typically had the station with just fuel tanks, then a separate craft on the surface for mining and ISRU conversion, with a third "fuel shuttle" that carries refined fuel from the surface to the station. Minmus is super forgiving though, and I now keep the ISRU on the station and just send up unprocessed ore - basically a big flying ore container. Once you have that system in place, you can create as you said a Fuel Tractor to get some from your Minmus station back to LKO. You'll have fuel losses circularizing around Kerbin and you'll need it to be easy to dock to your LKO fuel depot. Things to plan around. I can provide pictures of some of my refueling endeavors once I get home from work.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Skex posted:Mechjeb rules but can be quirky, seriously this functionality should be in the games core mechanics. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
I still use MechJeb for certain things, especially when it's something I'm not very good at, but I've found that over the long term I have more fun with the game, and am less likely to burn out on it, the less I lean on MJ. It's really easy to lose interest when you aren't actually playing the game yourself. These days, I hardly ever use MJ to execute maneuvers at all, and mainly use it for the Smartass and to plot difficult maneuvers I can't figure out myself. It was an essential learner's aid, and I would have never gotten good at the game without it, but it's definitely something to be used in moderation. I use the poo poo out of KER, though, don't think I could play without it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
i'll say to its credit that mechjeb helped me learn some concepts by watching what it did, especially for interplanetary transfers. however, at some point an update broke the docking for mechjeb and i uninstalled it, and after uninstalling it i have found ksp immeasurably more fun and satisfying. the only mods i use at all are outer planets and stockalike surface lights. even kerbal engineer does too much; i've come to enjoy mounting rescues when i run out of dv because i don't have readouts. though even with that said i still think something like kerbal engineer should be in the base game as a learnable skill for engineers since right now that class seems completely underdeveloped. DEEP STATE PLOT fucked around with this message at 16:20 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
That's pretty much what I did with Mechjeb too. Used the autopilot and watched what it did a few times, then emulated it. For docking, the secret is to set the other ship's docking port as the target, then just watch the navball, not the outside view. Installing RasterProp and playing KSP with IVA view only is also a fun challenge.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Why be mad at Mechjeb, I'm better at the game than it  It's really neat as something you can boot up and say fix my situation now and you can watch what it does to learn about how you might go about it yourself. YouTube is nice but it's alternatively sanitized easy to present training scenarios or else ridiculous feats of engineering and piloting so it's nice to have something like MechJeb to bail you out of your every day situation that doesn't exactly match a training video.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Maybe not autopilot/auto node creation but information displays would be handy, no reason you can see apoapsis only from map view or true altitude only in cockpit view
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
I guess it's a matter of what you find more interesting. I find the "flying" part less interesting than the design, planning and logistics aspects of the game. That said I pulled the trigger on a new gaming laptop because I was getting frustrated with the performance on my old anemic Phenom based system. Smoother operation may make certain things in the game less frustrating (like on my current system 1 second takes 3-5 seconds of real time to take place depending on what's going on) so I won't be as frustrated trying to run these maneuvers myself. The new computer is an I7 7700 with 16gb of ram and a 1060 video card so I am expecting it to behave much better (am amazed at how cheap a decent gaming laptop is nowadays, used to be you were looking at 2 grand easy for something like this yet I got it for $915 from Amazon, has a cosmetic blemish apparently for a couple hundred savings on it and as long as it's not a giant scratch on the screen it just means that I won't feel bad the first time I scratch it) . I still like the functionality that Mechjeb adds. And I don't just mean the auto pilot stuff (though that's nice) stuff like the DV info which is really useful when building things to know what's likely to work or not. To make sure that your craft has the TWR to get off what ever body it happens to be launching from? How much delta V it has under various situations. Good for planning missions (though it does rely on me having the knowledge of what to do with those numbers and what's needed which is a work in progress) The ability to plan a node, then tell Mechjeb to execute the node so you don't have to sit there carefully watching the timer go down while you time warp and save repeatedly to ensure that you don't miss it because of lag or some distraction is invaluable, particularly if you are like me and have children so you may have to leave at a moments notice. I mean do you really think that NASA does everything with slide rules and note pads? No they use computers. You still have to plan the maneuvers and run things you just don't have to do the calculations which is what computers are good at. And in all seriousness I'd have probably quit the game in frustration by now if that functionality wasn't available. One of the things that I really like about this game is that it's very sand boxy, and frankly I've never seen a game developer that is so positive and supportive of it's mod community. That people can take the central game and customize it to their purposes. Like all the people making warships and fighter craft. Personally I'm playing my Kerbals as peaceful utopian socialists who don't even have the concept of warfare. But I'm not going to look down on those who are having their fun with their warships and fighters. Given that it's neither multiplayer nor competitive I believe that one should do what makes the game fun for you. I kind of look at the minutia of manually flying every maneuver to be similar to mining in mine craft, It gets old real fast when what you really want to do is build fancy systems and structures. Mechjeb let's me get to the aspects of the game that I find more interesting and the great news is that if that other part gets boring to me I can always stop using Mechjeb and learn to do it manually (which honestly I end up having to do more than a fair bit of already given that Mechjeb gets some weird notions in it's head from time to time). What I'm really looking forward to is how this recording and replaying of missions works where you can automate certain repetitive tedious tasks like shuttling fuel from your Minmus refinery to your fuel depots. Eventually I'd like to have a busy and vibrant space program with Kerbals flitting around from place to place doing spacey stuff while I'm adding new capabilities and projects.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 20:32
|
|