Moesly_Armlis

The need for a procedural ladder type has already been suggested and this idea is something similar. The rungs that are part of the Z4k battery do not function; kerbals cannot grab hold of the rung. If this type of rung was available on more parts but instead allow a kerbal to hold onto.the rung, allows for more ladder options.. The rungs on the Hitchhiker and the Materials Processing Lab work as ladders. Maybe more parts should have rungs integrated. An option to hide/remove them from the Part Action menu in the VAB/SPH only.

When I first thought about finding asteroids on the surface I imagined it would stick out and should be buried beneath the surface somehow. After reading this article suggested by @nikokespprfan on monoliths and seeing the pictures of monoliths it really would be impressive and a thrill to someday see something similar in KSP.

Linking Dresteroids is part of something i am just working on. Seems neat and relevant that these pictures were taken last night. Tonight after a short inter planetary trip, arrives four smaller drestoid hauling vessels and I will be trying to link 20 or more of the C class. And by the way using grabbers to link these rocks is still a sure fire method of summoning Kraken attacks. That is a great notion.

Having a controllable magnet could be an alternative. The ability to magnetize would allow for precise alignment and lighter post docking bouncing. So along with the indicator a toggle should be available in the Part Action menu.

Persistent Control From Here Happens when joining multiple vessels into one vessel in the VAB/SPH then separating them in flight. Then selecting to control from a part such as docking port or command pod switch to a vessel out of physics range and then return. The control from here point will reset. Why not have the control from here point persistent. So many times have I started a maneuver only to realize the control from here point has reset after switching vessels.

You have it exactly. That would be unfortunate and would be considered an asteroid strike. Currently asteroids spawn around Dres and the same issue could occur if there is a station orbiting Dres in the danger zone. I am going to guess but the coding should already exclude spawning asteroids where something already exists. Spawning Ore Deposits Biomes influence ore deposit variety and potential. Grasslands and plains have less potential. Mountains, highlands and shores have exposed lithosphere and greater potential. On other planets features such as the poles, canyons, deep holes and massive craters have greater potential. It would be an added touch for the larger deposits buried partially below the ground and have something poking out akin to icebergs. Underwater deposits need not be buried and adds boats and submariners to perform surveys.

Targeting a vessel or a body that has inclination causes the intersect marker to rapidly flash on and off along different spots in the orbit. The intersect marker can indicate a 100 km separation and then just vanish when making small adjustments to the maneuver. Using the new feature to pin the intersect marker is great until it disappears and then it needs to be re-pinned.

The idea came to me after wrangling some asteroids around Dres. Why not have ore deposits on the surface that are just potatoroids. The part could be placed randomly. Ore concentration are much higher with potatoroids compared with the surface and are exhaustible. Prospecting becomes a thing when you might find a mother lode (a collection of multiple spuds lumped together) using a rover or flight survey. Implementing the M4435 Narrow Band scanner to locate spuds from space. This could be added to the game swiftly because the frame work is already in place. If parts could be added that would be able to harvest the potatoroid resources using low tech tools that only work on the surface of Kerbin, then a introductory fuel refinery could also be implemented. Potatoroids also offer surface samples. So there is potential for fuel, funds and science and maybe reputation gains when finding a mother lode.

The method is to revert from launch and the select surface attach parts.

Wait. Prank day was a few months ago.

Previously on KSP: A potatoroid could be unlocked in the VAB and could be used as a part. The method to unlock the potatoroid no longer works. #BringBackPotatoroidPart Now the only method of acquiring a constant supply of potatoroids is visiting boring Dres.

The patch is installed and crew disabled still had two CTD today in the tier three SPH. Both times happened when disassembling the craft and then selecting a new part from the list. I am thinking about the animations of the parts in the list. This is a very elusive bug. Great job on stalking down the beast so far.

Interesting observation for me is that working in the third tier VAB causes fewer crashes than working in tier one. When I posted here last I was in tier one and was having all sorts of VAB/SPH crashes. Now after advancing the VAB to tier three the crash rate almost have dropped to zero. In a tier three VAB an Hour can go by without a CTD compared to a tier one VAB where just loading a vessel resulted in having a CTD.

The challenge is going on my to do list. After researching trebuchet the best rotor so far is: + = AWESOME! This is the thread: Trebuchet

CTD happens when open the editor load a ship and then crash. Reloaded KSP and the craft and then within a minute of editing another crash. Sort of repeatable because that happened the same last night with another craft. There is rumor that there are those who do not experience any CTD. Hold on keep those pitchforks down for a minute! I have a question. Is there any commonality for those systems? Edit: Worked on same craft today and now no CTD after 2 hours.

Are there users that do not experience this crash? Is there any data on the percentage of users experiencing this issue? Should a poll be started? Crashes for me seem to happen quite often in the VAB. The crashes after decouple have been few. Crash when approaching another craft only happened once.

Rendezvous Mun In this challenge a normal career is granted five hundred science points. The task is to return science from Mun's surface. The limitations are: three vessel launches four starting contracts no facility upgrade. This is a tough boulder to crack but rewarding. Scoring is on how many science points from Mun surface landed. Penalty is minus 50 science points for orbiting debris. Bonus 50 science points for stock. Mods that do not change game play are fine. MJ but no auto piloting. No cheating. My completed run had two satellites that could transmit temperature readings orbiting Kerbin and Mun and one fuel tank debris. 340 SP earned from Mun's surface -50 SP Debris Leader Board MoeslyArmlis 290

The word dynamic could be replaced with percentage. The 0% could indicate the bottom of the stack and 100% represents the top. If the craft's stage stack has only one stage and for example a sub assembly is selected that has parts set at 100% this would cause a new top stage and the parts could then be assigned. If parts are set to 50% and added to a craft then this would add a top stage to a single stage craft and would split a two stage craft, placing the parts in the middle stage. Setting the slider to a corresponding percentage is how I am thinking about this idea.

That is a good start. Did not know about your patch, thanks and will give that a try. As for the staging via Part Action menu you bring up a good point. The slider setting could only allow for top or bottom stages until attached. This can still be useful when using a sub assembly for booster or payload.

In the planed features Observatory: Discover new celestial bodies to visit Would certainly be more inclined to visit the other planets but the kerbals cannot find them. What I mean is from a RP perspective waiting to visit other places when discovery becomes part of the KSP experience. In a sandbox game I have visited Duna and in SB mode might go interplanetary again.

Compared with the previous versions of KSP the Part Action Menus are more versatile. Now could be the time to expand on the usefulness and add some staging options. Setting Non Stage Already decouplers can be set to be non staged. This means the only wat to use the decoupler in flight is to use the Part Action menu/ This should apply to all parts that are capable of being staged. Staging Group Staging can happen the same way and through the Part Action Menu a stage number is present and a slider to set its relative staging position. The slider represents all staging positions and is dynamic. When parts are copied or moved the slider is persistent. This would enable parts such as launch clamps to always be on the bottom of the stage group and parachutes to be in the top group. Even after moving the part or using a sub assembly.

Could this button always be visible? The first time I go to use it and I feel like it is trolling me by disappearing when just about to click the button.

No problem. But I did not remember correctly. This video shows the launch of the orbiting lander and then another Litterbug lifter was used to deliver the fuel.

That low TWR was the reason for the drop tanks. Also had to set the gimbal to off for the first part of the launch.

Thuds and drop tanks were the most efficient lifter concept for careers that had 10% difficulty sliders. With vessel and VAB/SPH limitations two Thuds could lift the 18 tonne vessel. The vessel was designed to lift a fuel tank that would dock to an orbiting Mun/Minmus lander. Sometimes the drop drop tanks would survive the fall and be scattered around the launch pad. The vessel was then named the Litterbug lifter. edit: after reviewing the video I realized the Part Action Groups gave me trouble. Now the Part Action menus can be pinned and decouplers can be set to enable crossfeed.