James M

Yes. Maxed then out on spring and damper settings and they generally still tried to flop. Not sure whats going on.

Some of us like satellites. Some of us don’t. As I always say it’s better to give the power to the players when faced with decisions about difficulty or strategy. Personally I’m with the side that approves of a more robust and complex communication system purely for the sake of education. Furthermore, designing satellite networks enables players to explore and experiment with less frequently used orbit types. Heck, if Ksp1 hadn’t had commnet contracts, I would have never bothered to research and learn about stationary orbits, synchronous orbits, molniya orbits, and tundra orbits. Now while @kdaviper had a good point about satellites cluttering the active crafts list, that’s what filters are designed for. I realize that satellites aren’t a high priority right now, but hopefully one day we’ll get the chance to voice our opinions about this to them and they’ll listen.

Oh well there may have been my problem

Lemme know how it goes!

Landed 2 crafts on Mun and 1 craft on Minmus all using the LT-1 “Wallaroo” landing legs in 4x symmetry. Every time I did, my craft would sink all the way down to its engines and start falling over. The most successful variation I had was the third mission (Minmus one), whereby I carefully placed the legs as high as I could and as much weight as possible on the bottom of the lander. It took a couple seconds to finally settle into a comfortable position, but upon initial landing it still LOOKED like it wanted to flop over. Am I missing something or are the legs just weak? I guess I’m suggesting the devs take a closer look at how their compression behaves in general and try to stiffen them up a bit.

That made me laugh. Thanks!

Just tried to dock a lander and mothership in orbit of Minmus, Apollo-style, and holy cow. While using SAS, RCS, target mode.. literally all the things, it felt like unless I continuously thrusted I couldn’t get my vehicles close to one another. And even when I did, they then seemed to almost want to repel each other. It wasn’t until I turned off all assists and eyeballed the entire docking procedure that I managed to get the ports close enough and slow enough to dock. I can’t imagine a new player being able to do this.

I'm forced to wait till Thursday to begin my Exploration save 'cause work But! This will be what I'll be doing all Christmas break. I'm excited. And nervous Hopefully everything turns out well.

Oh yeah.. that. Can’t believe it’s been so long I forgot about save file corruptions. Pretty inexcusable if you ask me. I can forgive not adding stuff to a game so long as the game works in the end. Console version can’t even manage that.

It's still possible? I think the idea is worth them exploring.

Gonna definitely check that out! Thanks!

That Saturn-36 though...

I first learned and played KSP on console. The only reason I bought and transferred to PC was because I was getting tired of waiting forever for them to fix things and update. Once I got to PC, I remembered mods exist and I've never looked back since. Really do wish they'd fix console though. Having the throttle on a trigger was great. Keyboards suck in that respect though.

Honestly my issue with these is that I typically can't tell which of the splashes is my encounter to a celestial body and which one is my exit. Maybe add some depth to them or something to exaggerate that a bit? Is there some other way to tell for now which is which? What I've been doing is just tracing my orbits visually and messing with nodes. It works but I really wish it was more intuitive. Post edit: I think this is #7 on your list? Sorry if it is. This is so annoying >.>

The kraken strikes again.

Oh yeah forgot another thing. I tried the game again last night, and I was really surprised when I could see my maneuver vector on the other side of the navball. Pretty sweet.

I like ticker-tapes.

Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear warfare.

I'm afraid only Intercept can answer that question.

What part of our discussion insinuates that I intend to throw muck at KSP2? I've always been an advocate for this game's future and I remain so now. Please do not twist my words. Thanks.

It's not about nostalgia. It's about replacing historical figures. It isn't necessary. The only reason to remove these two characters was to appeal to a vocal minority of the ksp community. The devs talk about how they want to draw in new people to play ksp and inspire future space enthusiasts but then what, we erase the questionable parts of history for those new people because a few other people complained that they didn't like looking at an ugly part of history? C'mon man. Also, anything controversial SHOULD be debated. It's how we grow. We can't always just hide our problems away.

How does this increase representation?

I'd make the argument that all original 4 kerbals along with any Kerbals that were present in KSP1 for historical reasons should still be around SOMEWHERE in KSP2. Removing them seems weird. And maybe "woke" in some cases. If anything, new Kerbals should be added to that historical roster such as Goddard, Shephard, Sally Ride, Etc. The main audience of Kerbal are space fans. Appeal to that.

I'm hella excited to try KSP2 again, but I think I'm going to try and hold on 'till the For Science! update. It's great though to see so many improvements made to the game lately. Phenomenal job to all those on the team for working hard to make Kerbal great again lol

We back!? WE’RE BACK! Let’s go baby!