SR2 sounds better and better with each update. May I suggest increasing the contrast and saturation a bit, as the screenshots look a little pale? Or, perhaps, give users the ability to tweak saturation/contrast to their liking, that would be best and pretty easy to implement.
Beautiful. Now you have to (eventually) give us weapons and targets to blow up in the game, it would be a shame to not exploit these amazing effects to the max.
While this is great, it seems like it would limit everyone to using landing legs of the same design. Will we be able to disableBaseMesh and add parts to them to modify their appearance?
Also, do these get wobbly when attached to heavier craft?
@AndrewGarrison I think no weapons is a bad idea and will lower the appeal of the game. People love weapons, it gives them things to do in the game other than just fly around. Building kinetic weapons especially, in space, would be so much fun.
The panels look pretty cool. I'm guessing these work differently from pistons and rotators, i.e. they don't cause changes in angular momentum? If so, is it possible to introduce physics-less rotators and pistons, so that they're rock-solid?
Another question, what's the reason for the price feature? It seems like it will only artificially limit what players can build. As in, building a small space capsule would cost less, so anyone can do it, but building a Death Star would be prohibitively expensive -- is that correct?
For that gravity, the radius is off by a factor of ten. Jupiter has a surface gravity close to 25 m/s2, and its radius is 70,000 km. Earth's radius is 6,400 km.
SR2 sounds better and better with each update. May I suggest increasing the contrast and saturation a bit, as the screenshots look a little pale? Or, perhaps, give users the ability to tweak saturation/contrast to their liking, that would be best and pretty easy to implement.
+5 6.6 years agoNice. Are they wobbly, as in SimplePlanes?
+2 6.9 years agoBeautiful. Now you have to (eventually) give us weapons and targets to blow up in the game, it would be a shame to not exploit these amazing effects to the max.
+1 6.2 years agoWhile this is great, it seems like it would limit everyone to using landing legs of the same design. Will we be able to disableBaseMesh and add parts to them to modify their appearance?
Also, do these get wobbly when attached to heavier craft?
+1 6.8 years ago@AndrewGarrison Well, that makes sense.
6.8 years ago@AndrewGarrison I think no weapons is a bad idea and will lower the appeal of the game. People love weapons, it gives them things to do in the game other than just fly around. Building kinetic weapons especially, in space, would be so much fun.
6.8 years agoIs that... is that auto-detailing I see on the fuselage? Nice.
6.8 years agoThe panels look pretty cool. I'm guessing these work differently from pistons and rotators, i.e. they don't cause changes in angular momentum? If so, is it possible to introduce physics-less rotators and pistons, so that they're rock-solid?
Another question, what's the reason for the price feature? It seems like it will only artificially limit what players can build. As in, building a small space capsule would cost less, so anyone can do it, but building a Death Star would be prohibitively expensive -- is that correct?
6.8 years agoFor that gravity, the radius is off by a factor of ten. Jupiter has a surface gravity close to 25 m/s2, and its radius is 70,000 km. Earth's radius is 6,400 km.
6.9 years ago