autumnalequinox

Each career game has a "theme" and a little historical backstory so I don't get totally lost. They usually involve some kind of global superpower space race. My current one though I started out with higher tech levels and called it United Space Consortium. But most of my careers I just call Ad Astra. I use the Kitty cat flag (not sure if it's stock or mod).

I've been thinking of some simple-ish FMs that could help flesh out BROKE. I know it's intended for the mod to eventually involve costs per active flight based on the type to keep contact/control with them so obvs I don't want to mess with that. I'd like to make some of these myself but may need some help/guidance. 1. (+KCT): Cost for every spacecraft kept in storage (already built and awaiting rollout). Essentially a maintenance fee. Not sure if KCT keeps track of the build points of each vessel but if it does I could see it being a cost per BP x the number of days stored. 2. Research cost. Active mobile research labs cost money to run. A check to see if a research lab is generating science (if that's possible) or simply exists and a flat charge for that. This will help mitigate the OP of mobile research labs. You won't technically be "buying" science since you still have to staff the lab, run experiments, etc. But it will be painful to just endlessly spam science (since this could suck away $). 2b: Cost for science! As sort of the anti-ScienceFunding (an Ippo mod) you may have to pay for every point of science you use to do research. This represents the payroll for your aerospace engineers. 3. Building maintenance fees: Flat cost per level of buildings to represent upkeep. This could be one of the largest costs that can eat up the budget quick since administration tends to be a very large expense for government/private organizations. This is a good check on time warping since simply maintaining the KSC will be expensive. The simplest way to do this would be a % of the original building cost per year (say 3-10% or whatever player wants). This is the first one I want to do since it "seems" easy. 4. Private Space Corp Stock Market: An option to turn a private space corporation into a publicly traded company. Some kind of RNG determines the state of the stock market and generates or takes income each quarter. Reputation could modify this so as long as rep is decent it is unlikely to wipe out your budget. Has potential for big $ but also a chance for big loss. Essentially you gamble with your budget. This could be taken further with the option to buy your own "stocks" to reduce the unpredictability in exchange for losing the chance for big $ (I know this is not how these things work IRL).

Oh! Good find. I hate launching in the dark and that's totally what happened to me. I just didn't make the connection. I'm going to have to load up BROKE again and just manually warp instead (besides, I love launching in the early morning anyways with that beautiful Scatterer/EVE-enhanced sunrise in the background).

Has anyone written an MM config for DERP with Deadly Reentry? I just ran a sim and the poor pod evaporated at about 35k. I'm not sure how DRE does it's calcs, should I try to raise it's temperature tolerance or give it some ablator? I don't want to overload it's mass or anything but survival from at least LKO would be nice.

I just built my first launcher with powered recovery in mind. And it worked perfectly! I just committed a small fuel tank to it (and made the fuel unchecked) and got back oodles of money. Even though I lose a bit of launch weight this is saving me so much money for routine launches.

I discovered the way to get large vertical-launched spaceplanes up without tumbling is to place two liquid fueled boosters far above the spaceplane using struts/structural components. It puts the center of lift far below the mass, so essentially the spaceplane is the launcher's "fins". It looks weird as hell. I feed fuel from the boosters into the spaceplane's engine as well and by the time they detach the spaceplane can finish the burn. I wish I had a pic but I haven't tried this since a few versions ago.

I have been playing for years and have yet to land on Laythe, or send a manned mission to Jool or Moho. And I now use OPM for extra worlds (of which I've never visited). I do this on purpose, to keep the wonder. And taking breaks from the game for a few months helps. To me KSP is the ultimate puzzle game (and I hate puzzle games). The challenge to build a mission that works with the 100+ realism enhancing mods I use is the game to me. Also running a Space Program and managing resources, money, crew, etc. I spend 70% of my "game" time researching RL space missions. I've started talking like an engineer. I still wish I was born a bit later and had discovered this game in my formative years. I may have actually become an aerospace engineer instead of just "wishing I could be one when I was 12 and never following through". So yeah.

I've finally been using this mod for the entirety of a career game. It's so nice to watch my old, early, rather useless sats fall out of the sky. I've also gotten into a nice routine of boosting assets to save fuel (as a nice boost can result in good savings compared to active station keeping). Oh and my inhabited space stations now need propellant tanker runs or boosts by their visiting craft periodically. It's so realistic and I love it. I've been loving it. I've said it before but it's such a nice addition to my hardcore program management games. There is almost this harrowing feeling that no orbit is permanent (around Kerbin) and there is this constant dread that unless something is done, inevitably it will fall out of the sky. It makes space just a bit more scary and has brought back some old feelings I had when I first played KSP (such as my first EVA and my first time toying with life support mods). Looking forward to all the new stuff coming down the pipe.

So I have Kerbal Atomics, NFE, cryo, etc. And all the appropriate patches installed. So I load up the stock NV and it has it's NFE reactor built into it. Once loaded in a flight scene, however, there is no info about the reactor (everything is blank) and I can get it to use fuel but not produce any thrust at all. Anyone seen this problem? I have scoured the config for the nuclear engine stock part and can't see anything wrong. I'm going to load up a sandbox and test all the other engines and reactors and see what's going on. After testing, only the electrical generating reactors work. With the NF patch installed, none of the engine reactors function at all. They give no temperature data and produce no thrust. FINAL EDIT: Nm. I got it to work. weird. I just had activate the engine first then the reactor. In that order. By staging it, not GUI activation. Just in case anyone else had that problem.

Wonders of the Universe. Brian Cox.. mmm. Oh yeah and there is a bunch of stuff about space too.

I've always liked the idea of Titan "lava life"...if it turns out Titan is still geologically active (there is a compelling theory that it isn't: Moore, J.M.; Pappalardo, R.T. (2008). "Titan: Callisto With Weather?". American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2008 11: 6.) The energy potential is there near cryo-volcanic hotspots. If any active surface flows can be detected and a probe sent there, well, that could be the good stuff. But there are obviously way more informed posters in this thread.

Thanks! I DLed realism overhaul and scoured the cfgs and couldn't find anything easily recognizable. I can totally work with this thanks Starwaster!

Is there a way to write a simple MM config to universally decrease the amount of EC solar panels generate? I'm still new to making configs I typically just copy/paste or write CTT configs. I'm thinking something like reducing it either from /secs to /minutes or simply reducing their EC production by 50% or so.

This is a great idea. It would save so much headache in the tracking station! Looking forward to it.

Ha! See I'm not totally crazy. I actually used to do something like this before I switched systems.

I've been working on this problem myself for awhile. I used to use a series of names that I used for years based on various gods/goddesses (Danu, Morrigan, Thor, etc). To keep my VAB files organized I started using mission numbers like 1 "mission name" and so on. Now I use "program designations", which are also named, followed by vehicle names. For launchers I use "S1 or 2 followed by a letter" much like the Saturn launch system. Oh and I also use the "notes" mod to keep things even more organized. Honestly I just started a new career game because my last was becoming hideously disorganized. I didn't even know where half my designs were. Example: My initial manned missions are under the "Valhalla" designation. Completed payloads with launchers get "Valhalla-1 or 2 etc". Launch systems are divided by stages "Thor S1A" or "Thor S2B". Full spacecraft get a name and a program designation unless they are universal systems. I have put waaaaaaay more effort into this then anything else, like flying spacecraft.

I've also noticed it seems much easier to mod the mod, so to speak. I'm thinking of tweaking some things for my personal use until the next version. Since I use UKS as well I may require the noms to use water to nerf it a bit. I'm also thinking of pushing them back in CTT and making my own part that works as a low efficiency recycler that can be attached anywhere (but draws crazy amounts of power). Since I make supply loss deadly (and quick, like 5 minutes unless EVA) I'm also thinking of adding a module that puts some supplies in command pods (maybe a day's worth). It's a bit off from the spirit of the mod but I don't think there's anything wrong with "borrowing" some concepts from TAC.

I would definitely recommend anyone who thought it seemed silly to give it a try. I've posted some settings earlier in the thread for those who enjoy the "hardcoreness" of TAC to try with USI. It's really easy to make it just as unforgiving, if not more so. That was the only thing that kept me at bay originally. So hats off to you for the suite of options.

Okay so this isn't a bash against TAC-LS. But I started a new career game, loaded the new rebuilt TAC (I used USI in my last one) and was just like... "meh..." The containers contain too much LS for their size, the recyclers are too heavy, and modding the numbers is difficult with the huge strings involved. Plus I was like "man now I miss hab and homesick, and the power consumption default is too low". And in the end I just use "life support supplies" containers anyways, so having three seperate "things" doesn't mean a whole lot. Plus I use UKS/MKS so it just seems like a feature loss on my part. You won me over RoverDude. After nearly 3 years, you won me over. You'll have me forever when those stack-able greenhouses come out.

Another good mod for that: Mission Controller 2 has an option to set a "revert cost" of any amount desired. Also feels less cheaty

I constantly tell myself: From this point on, it's hardcore mode. Unless I'm using a mod sim, any and all failures are real. Kerbals die, rockets blow up. I prepare all kinds of contingencies, such as LAS and DERP escape pods. Then I say "f it" and revert anyways. I hate having limited time to play I guess. Although one time I said "You have to eat this mistake, not packing enough life support" and I let a rookie Kerbal die while the Vet watched. My partner just finished watching the Martian and won't forgive me for letting "Mark Watney" die.

I use KCT (Kerbal Construction Time) which has a built in simulator. It costs funds and requires you first visit the body with a probe or manned. I have also heard good things about KRASH, another sim mod, which has similar requirements. I typically test all my wild ideas at least once.

Still in my career game, I had days without a crash and then bam: one after the other and now only when deleting parts or loading large craft.

Oh and after extensive testing I found Orbital Decay does not interfere with mechjeb as long as you have station-keeping on (which is always recommended if doing maneuvers in the future). Overall I love the changes! Good stuff everything is so polished. It worked well with my already existing career save and I love being able to select engines and fuel types now! Thanks for all the hard work this is an awesome update.

As far as this is concerned: The stock orbital "decay" bug already wreaks havoc with Mechjeb. The workaround is time warping at a low time warp before manuever nodes are executed (or making sure Mechjeb auto time warps as much as possible). Landing is difficult as well but not impossible, the autopilot has to make tons of micro-corrections. My question is: With station keeping engaged is there still decay? And how does the mod compound/affect the stock orbital energy loss bug? Just curious. I use Mechjeb heavily and am worried about it being rendered totally non-functional versus the current situation of workable.