Vegvisir

Yeah it's definitely harder than 0.25 or whatever. But in a good way, things make more sense! (maybe) I've been having a great time getting back into it. Career mode is quite rewarding, as far as playing games goes

I bought this at the start of October, have very quickly been turned off it. I'll go back to it, it will still probably be [a bit] fun. But their approach to pricing and just the general way the game is/is going just...kinda peeves me. Haha, KSP was a way better use of $30. Horizons, with currency, currently would cost me maybe twice as much as the base game, and who knows if buying it now is best? They'll probably do something in another few months where it's a lot cheaper, or another kind of deal. Seems how they do it, when you buy is hit and miss to how much you may end up feeling ripped. It's seems very geared toward multiplayer, and a game where using my imagination to fill in their blanks just seems naf. Maybe you could argue KSP requires the same, and I'd say maybe so, but it seems less of a problem, and more fitting... Eeehh. Some things are pretty awesome. Yep it's huge. The visuals are nice. It doesn't run terribly. Sometimes it's pretty intense when Surprise! NPC attack! and you're outmatched. Sometimes it's very rewarding, getting that new ship etc.

Most of the "how do I even spaceplane? / what launch profile?" type threads have been answered thus. Use air breathing engines to their maximum potential. It's cheaper (or so I think). Look at it this way: If you're "zoom" climbing; you're pretty much using a rocket. May as well launch a rocket. Put a plane-like thing on the top of engines and boosters if you want to fly around in atmos after coming back; I've done that early Career before unlocking the Turbojet. It works well enough if your craft is stable enough for the gravity turn. I'm not 100% sure, but even with Turbojets, rapidly climbing to 10km or so and then levelling off to build speed; doesn't that still lead to lost thrust overall? I guess it depends on your craft, its weight and so on.

This is the newest one that I might use for a while. I didn't make it, it's just cool Edit: I just turned this awesome sillyness into a flag http://poorlydrawnlines.com/comic/bad-small-cat/

Pink is the "other" intersection occurrence - as far as I know. There's just two intersection nodes, because math and science and orbits or something.... In this case (often with mine, too) this other period of intersection has a larger distance than the one you're making use of - which happens to be the orange one. 1.1km is definitely close enough. I don't know what the max comfortable distance is, but EVA Kerbals can jump a long way Looking good for Bob! My first attempts at rendezvous were terrible. Last time I did it I used a guide on the KSP wiki, but there's others around (such as Snark's - which I'll look over later I think ! )

Early career I always go for the first (and generally second as well) plane tech unlocks as soon as I can. With a lot of time on Kerbin, doing the "science at this location" type contracts, aeroplanes are the way to go. Downside here though is that it takes longer IRL to do it since your craft is slower. And physics/time warp is a bit iffy above x3 even with a nice and stable construction. But I quite like that part of the career.

I'm gonna be lazy and literally copy pasta this from another topic.... I use TAC. I think I like it more than the USI version, and I haven't honestly tried any others. That's just personal preference, though. I gather USI is maybe "easier"(?) since it has less resources involved. I've yet to run a "big" mission to really grasp the amounts required and gauge the difficulty for myself... But, it just fits I think. Build a craft, load the fuel, good to go...or are we? What do my Kerbals eat!? What do they breathe!? I know that with TAC, at least, you can tweak the consumption rates. Although a bit lacking in context, I'll say this anyway: There's different sized containers, and using one of the smallest combination types (i.e. all 3 resources in one), a crew of 5 Kerbals had (I think) 14 days of not-dying, at default rates.

I use TAC. I think I like it more than the USI version, though that's just personal preference. I gather USI is maybe "easier"(?) since it has less resources involved. I've yet to run a "big" mission to really grasp the amounts required and gauge the difficulty for myself...so maybe my recommendation doesn't have much worth!!! But, it just fits I think. Build a craft, load the fuel, good to go...or are we? What do my Kerbals eat!? What do they breathe!? As to your rescue plan, I'll throw my small change in, in support of the low orbit approach. I am perhaps at a similar-ish skill level (?) and I find landing on "target" difficult. Treat it not too differently from the "stock" rescue Kerbal missions, except it's a Mun orbit one, not Kerbin. Getting that fuel balance, though..that's where the likes of Slashy come in I don't plan, measure, math or otherwise. I just stick it together and press spacebar. It totally works EDIT: Nice pic with the flag btw

I think I'll give this a shot. The other day I did a fresh install and re-acquired mods, with a couple extra to what I was using before. 30 mods, though some are the "core" type, foundations for many, and most are new parts (e.g. Near Future set, Kolonization, Pathfinder etc). Currently it's basically unplayable, crashing around the 3.6GB mark very quickly, if I get past the loading and the KSC scene. I tried turning on scatters to 10%, less "boring" terrain, I think I'll have to turn that off again though. Dropped to Beautiful rendering, haven't dropped Textures from below Full Res yet. I've got the RAM, if anything my card will let me down some (GeForce 740M) but I've been able to play it at decent performance for a long time. Certainly seems the mods are causing the max memory issue. Looking forward to that 64-bit EDIT: So am I right in assuming this pretty much negates the use of some of the in-game settings (like AA for example)? Some things need to be changed through the GPU settings?

Just be glad you're not using a life support mod Poor Kerbals. Good luck!

That's really cool!! Are the intakes along the underside to promote stability? I've had a few contracts for splashed down sciencing, I just slowly and very carefully drove my plane into the water What did I do...reloaded the game lots because it kept crashing Couldn't even get my Career-start n00b craft 1 to launch. Need to lower some graphics settings or trim mods I guess. I'm only using 30 (I don't think that's excessive?) though they are mostly parts types (Near Future, Kolonization, Pathfinder etc).

Yeah I'm using CKAN, it's a really great tool. Totally simplifies the mod browsing and gathering process. I had it going before but with a fresh install went through CKAN again. Filtered for compatibility to 1.0.4, and one particular mod ("toolbar") even has 1.0.4 in the meta data. Yet version checker reports 1.0.2, and I think the mod's forum thread lists the latest update is for 1.0.2. So I'll remove that and see if I get more stability; I don't think it was a dependent one, just suggested/recommended.

Spent the evening downloading and getting mods again. Ready to get started with a new Career game tonight. Had a few crashes though so maybe some of the mods aren't playing nice.

I'm setting sights on Duna and/or Eve for my next unmanned mission in Career. This thread is helpful

That's my problem...seems this is a game where to succeed reliably, one has to plan and understand and all that. Fair enough. It's the sim part of it. I just put stuff together, press space bar and rofl around

Hmm, this happened to me once. I actually kinda ditched the craft. It was unmanned, and using aero braking, what little fuel was left, and RCS-ing like crazy the entire way down, I managed to save the important science parts for a recovery.

This is what I've been using, also early career. I'd like to find a way to increase it's range. Once it's achieved orbit there's not a lot left for maneuvers, in orbit or back in atmos. Here it's gliding down because not enough to get home. I'm not sure if more fuel is the answer, since that's just more weight. A better executed launch perhaps.

hehe, yeah this. I've been doing atmospheric missons for a long time, getting a lot of temperature scans and stuff like that. Flying several missions in a row and tying as many of those objectives together has kept me busy - and has actually put a bit of a halt on the science gathering, as I've done most of Kerbin now. I've got probes heading to Mun and Minmus, and in the meantime have continued to do some short term Kerbin-based stuff. I suppose for me it depends on "what else is going on". If not much, I'll time warp until the vessel arrives. Otherwise, keep flying I say I'm totally gonna get the Alarm Clock mod before I start up this weekend though.

Haha they we certainly do! I'm fairly rookie at it. I've played for a goodly number of hours but haven't managed to make it beyond Kerbin and it's moons, not even with probes. Even in Sandbox before Science mode, my focus actually never went beyond; after the un-Kerbal-ed missions and then landings I set about a station to refuel in LKO. At that point I didn't get the hang of docking, or even rendesvous. Then other games I suppose. With Science and now Career mode it's more "interesting", there's obviously that level of progression, at least in the parts which affect what you can do to a degree. In my Career I'm at the point where landings on Mun and Minmus are the next logical step, but I'm also gonna send probes further out. I'm feeling the bug again and it's a long weekend so time for some Kerbal-ing, come on end of work day

I thought it was pretty cool, too, and the 3D was totally worth it. I also was thinking of spacey-orbital-KSP-related stuff as well, I was like when they talked about the speed at intersect...... Science the .... out of it!!!!

Minmus. Oh yeah, I'm a KSP pro. Look out, Kerbol system!

I used my successfully tested SSTO spaceplane to rescue a Kerbal, this being the first actual mission done with this craft. Unfortunately the timing didn't work out to get a second strandee in the same flight. But even so, after recovery it only cost me maybe 1K!!!! A nice payday from that contract. And you can see in one of the screenshots how fantastically awesome my return trajectory turned out, and was at least 85% guess work

Dunno if anyone has mentioned it, but turn on fine control (caps lock by default). Planes behave nicer then EDIT: I've often been reckless with landing. Sometimes it works, but for best results - throttle down and descend slowly from some way out of your chosen landing area. Come down as slow as you can. If you do it nicely and your craft can handle it, pfft runways, who needs 'em

Thanks for the tips Slashy For what I want to do, I think heavier ones will be the go for now, with passengers and such. But I did it! Gonna refine my design so 1) doesn't run out of fuel so soon, if possible and 2) perhaps build variants for probe deploys and debris missions. I dunno if I can make fuel missions work, doubt I'd have enough left over for it to be worthwile.

I spaceplane'd to orbit. Phew. Much trial and error, but in the end Scott Manley provided the guidance, indirectly at least. What a legend. The Kolovrat VIII. 5 tourists had a great time. They even got to watch Valentina tick off the last few things for 2 science contracts. Then they landed at this nice lake. It was totally intentional, not because they ran out of fuel 900km from KSC...not at all xD