M5000

I've been here since early 2013, I believe is when I started. I can't remember exactly what version I started on, I think it was .18.something but here's some stuff I remember: -The demo was .13 when I joined -"Rovers" consisted of a fuel tank, some stuff to keep the electricity and control core alive, a rocket engine, and some landing gear strapped to the tank. -NovaPunch, Kethane, Bobcat Ent, MechJeb pre-2.0. -The shuttle and inline cockpit had no custom IVA just that blank plate thing. -KSP was not on Steam yet. -Other things. My forum profile says April of 2013, I believe I played a few months before I made a forum profile...I...Think.....Oh wait, reading above I forgot all about the great wipe of 2013...I don't know if I had to re-create an account or not..Hm..Curious.

This is probably my #1. I've been playing since..I think .18.0 (the demo when I started was .13, I remember that) and there has never been even a single time that my game has been unplayable due to something the devs did or a decision the team had made. The only time it's been unplayable is if I decide to try a mod and it ends up being way too OP, at which point I just remove it and continue with my life...

Very nice...Will be using that.

Gorgeous lifters you have there. Have any pics in-game? And did you use a special trick to make that picture or are you just good with Photoshop/GIMP/whatever? Edit: I see in-game pics. Do you have MORE in-game pics?

I do this as well, although with this save I've been creating rockets as there have been holes/need for them, but I used to make them all at the beginning. I typically name things like this: -Rockets and lifters are always named after stars. My heaviest rockets are the Betelgeuse series, these are the muscle of the fleet and can support massive payloads, the biggest being the Betelgeuse XXRM. The mid to heavy workhorses for lifting most medium to heavy payloads are the Canopus series, they are typically simple rockets but get the job done. Medium lifters are Vega series, Lights are Pollux, and manned-mission rated lifters (Basically ones outfitted with proper equipment to take care of a failure without damage to payload) are Procyon. -Rocket-Launched OTVs (non-spaceplanes) are named after sea creatures - The main OTV I use is named Nautilus and it has several variants on a base model. -Planes are usually birds or other things that fly, spaceplanes can be mythical creatures, flying or non flying, but do not have to be. -Probes and Satellites are usually some witty acronym, or whatever word sounds cool or something I make up. They're more or less random. -Stations are usually something-STAR, but this may change as I get more. Right now all I have is KerbSTAR which is Kerbin Station for Testing And Research. -Rovers are a land-based animal usually, name not necessarily being in English, for example one of my Eve rovers was named Tortuga. -Landers grab any old deity name -Bases sort of do the station thing, but also may be like a probe/satellite in that they're just kind of random.

Interesting little plane there.. Is it asymmetrical or is that just the picture? And if it is asymmetrical, was it intentionally so?

Shouldn't be anything special.. You have to tell the game which input you want to be what under the main menu's settings. I have an Extreme 3D Pro as well and my setup follows the typical flight stick controls (mostly): -Forward/Back axis - Pitch -Side/Side axis - Roll -Twist axis - Yaw -Throttle on the throttle slider -Hat switch is typically used to control camera but I don't think the game likes it that way, I usually bind the hat switch to docking planar translation controls then two other buttons to the up/down but that's not the best I've found. -Trigger might be good as staging or as a very frequently used action group -The rest are literally just buttons to do with as you want.

I..Don't see why it wouldn't? At least for KSP, not sure about E:D. When I want to use analog inputs, I use an Xbox 360 controller or a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro joystick. I'd be less concerned with compatibility and more concerned with build quality. ~10 bucks probably isn't going to be too great of a unit. I know from experience that cheaper controllers are (usually) never worth the price savings. I'd recommend going, if price has to be super low to go with something like this, assuming you don't need vibration: http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-940-000110-Gamepad-F310/dp/B003VAHYQY If you do, still think a wired XB360 controller is the best bet: http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Wired-Controller-Windows-Console/dp/B004QRKWLA/ Or for the same approximate price here's the Logitech Extreme 3D pro which is used by a lot of players of this game. (No vibration though) but is one of the best cheap joysticks out right now (if anyone has a better unit chime in). http://www.amazon.com/Extreme-3D-Pro-Joystick-Windows/dp/B00009OY9U/ Up to you to figure out what you need but personally I'd stay away from cheaper units like that. But to answer your original question: "It should."

I think you could satisfy both sides of the argument, that is to say, realism versus balance, if you were to simply require those who wanted to use a thermocouple (a separate part, perhaps) to also be equipped with cumbersome and heavy radiator fins, as the RTG also needs cooling, so why then, wouldn't the NERVA based reactor?

I think I did a 12Km out/12Km back EVA on the Mun with mostly jetpack power, wanted to go faster than the rover was allowing...

I like your rover! Looks quite impressive form the picture! As for the mod packs, I can identify the following: -KW Rocketry batteries -B9 lights -I forget the name, but whatever it is that adds the tank tracks -I believe those white things are radiators from Near Future Propulsion, though I'm not sure, which means there's probably a reactor on there somewhere, plus the nuclear fuel canisters also appear to be from the same pack. I just can't locate the reactor... Hm.. Those are all the non-stock parts I can see, hopefully this helps people who are wondering what some of the parts are. -M5K

If you've updated to the latest version, which is 0.23, you should be able to tweak the legs so that the suspension is locked, making them behave more or less exactly like they did in the older versions.

This is a gorgeous looking shuttle, pretty much the best one I've ever seen made publicly available, and especially considering it's made of stock parts. And the fact that it has a little four-kerb compartment that makes the shuttle able to hold the 7 crew members that the real thing could, and they come out into the main payload bay and everything, and I just cannot express the amount of impress-ed..ness I have for this amazing looking craft. While I generally don't download people's craft, since I prefer to make my own, I may download this one to tear it apart and see how you did it. Beautiful craft, I really like it. -M5K

Do I "hate" the pod? Absolutely not. Are there improvements that I would make? Yes, for sure. -As mentioned, the door matches up oddly with all the vertical-stack based pods. It should be matched up with the likes of the landercan and such. I understand why it'd be offset, though, as it was an early pod. -Personally, if asked to redesign I'd give it a bit of a texture update of some sort.. Except I'm bad at textures. -Kind of wish it had a built-in heatshield-like thing, like the single man pod. It looks so bare and adding one is kinda pointless. -The fact that it has texture-based RCS thrusters with obvious burn marks, yet they are nonfunctional. I'd love if they'd assign thrust points to them, and possibly add a bit of geometry so that they were vaguely nozzle-shaped. Just a thought. Overall, though, it's the only stock 3-man pod we have, and one of the best 3-man pod out there. The only one that has real competition with it is the 3-man capsule from the KOSMOS pack, but I don't see a major reason NOT to use it, it's more or less perfectly functional.

Of course! I love those big wheels! The lifter for this thing was insane, it was like four massive lifters, one on each corner. I still have no idea how, or why, that entire mission worked. Here it was landing... Kind of a bad picture but it shows the skycrane (more of a landercrane, as it landed first then dropped the rover a short distance onto the surface) in the background. And here it is in all of its 12-wheel glory. Yes, there was a MechJeb module on the back. No, I did the flight entirely manually, I just needed MJ to help with rover autopiloting. To be entirely honest, this was probably my favorite (and best) rover I've ever launched. It crewed 16 Kerbals and I was constantly leaping and bounding over hills and craters with no real damage... Though, there was one point where I blew out all the wheels from going too fast. I slid over a kilometer until it finally stopped so a Kerb could get out and repair the wheels. That was fun... Though, through the whole mission, I don't believe there was a single hitch. Not one quicksave or quickload, no structural failures, it actually held together quite well, surprisingly.