Vanamonde

Well, yes, it will be dead if people are posting the stuff that belongs there elsewhere. Thread moved.

Cruise: 10.5 tons of fuel per hour. TONS!

There are two primary places to look for news about the game's development; there's the forums Announcements sub-forum, and periodic updates about events and upcoming game aspects in The Daily Kerbal sub-forum. And you might not have been released from the forum's spambot protection yet when you tried to add a signature. It should work if you try it now, though.

This how-to question moved to the how-to section, and all is right with the world once more.

There are several threads like this already, folks. Some examples: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/67467-What-are-the-most-important-things-you-ve-learned-about-playing-KSP-to-pass-on http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/58260-Tips-and-tricks-you-found-out-yourself?highlight=tips+tricks It's more helpful if the information is less scattered around the forum, so please add posts to those existing threads rather than start another one of the same sort. Thanks, and closing this one for the sake of keeping the forum tidy.

The three ocean worlds (Kerbin, Eve, and Laythe) have two surfaces, and thus, twice the rendering.

zeppelinmage, I know you're not a newbie, but it's easy to overlook the obvious stuff sometimes. It's very easy to confuse oneself about which side stack is which, and that sort of thing. Mouse over the sepratrons themselves and make sure the ones you want to fire have their boxes on the staging display show the white border, or mouse over the staging icon and see if the right sepratrons turn green. It's likely you simply have the sepratrons from one asparagus stage assigned to the boosters of another. (I do this all the stupid time. )

Yeah, don't delete in your own saved game file because that will wipe out your own saved ships. Clear out the "ships" folder in your KSP main folder, and then the stock ships will not appear in any of your save files within that version of KSP.

How about rather than trying to capture the ship, just EVA the pilot to a rescue ship?

Confirmed that the temple is above ground again in .23

Check The Alien Years, by Robert Silverberg. The only aliens-invade-earth story that actually makes sense.

Welcoming another Swede to the forum. And not to be all scoldy when you're still new, but there is actually a forum rule against discussing/asking about release dates, because it has led to nasty arguments in the past. They come when they're ready.

There have been times when the Squad guys would have been in serious physical danger if they were near me. I shut the game down and go stomping off in a towering rage. And the next day, I think of a way around the problem, and come back. It's just part of the psychology of we who play games of this sort. We tend to care about them a little TOO much.

There are always things being worked on which are later dropped or replaced with something else, not just in KSP, but in any major project. I suspect a Q&A like this wouldn't be very interesting, because the answer to just about every question would simply be, "We decided not to use it." What more are you looking for? (Not being snitty. Just asking.)

Here's a craft file you can download which delivers an orange tank to an orbit of 300km or more. It doesn't need a tug because it's a robotic ship itself. Use it, or take it apart to see how it works.

Sorry to be a spoilsport, but politics is indeed off-limits for our friendly little forum (2.2.b). Thread closed before it turns friends into enemies.

I am proudest of our ability to remain focused on the subject of the thread. (Hint, hint.)

You mean like the docking trainer I made?

My suspicion is that the Mk 1 and I-2 pods are the ones intended to include re-entry heat shields when that factor is added to the game. After all, they're the ones that actually look like capsules and have aerodynamic shapes for falling backwards through atmospheres. So I always assumed that the weight of the 1-2 was, in part, due to it having a built-in heat shield and being built to keep a crew alive during re-entry. But this is just my assumption.

Physics warp does things you wouldn't expect it to do, such as making vehicles behave as if they're heavier than they are. Experiment: have the vehicle parked with the brake on, and go into physics warp. You will see the structure sag as if it's getting heavier. And when it does, there's more of that misalignment of the wheels to the ground that I was describing earlier, and it might even (I don't know) magnify differences in traction between the two sides of the vehicle.

Hello Chadster. Welcome to the forum.

Everybody tries that idea sooner or later. Efficiency isn't the problem. Steering tends to be a nightmare and structural failures are common. Also, thrust can get out of hand because it has to start with what it needs to lift the whole mass, but that becomes proportionally stronger as you discard tanks, and can lead to the ship damaging itself with excess G loads. If it could be made to work, though, it would be more efficient than discarding engines with expended stages as in more conventional staging methods.

I suspect you have so much thrust pushing into so much mass that the SRBs are simply tearing loose. You do have them strutted, but it looks like each one is only strutted to other SRBs which are no more firmly attached. I would suggest to you strutting across the stages to distribute the stress on the SRB/adaptor joint, using an arrangement similar to this example. You can use helper parts like that little cubic strut to avoid the nuisance of hitting the part directly above the SRB.

I have to disagree about that being a good thing. Since computers became powerful enough to run real-time for FPS and non-turn for tacticals and strategics, every game HAS to be real-time, even if there's no advantage to it. Take the newer X-Coms. You have to continually pause the game to re-assess, get situational awareness, and change orders. Well, as long as you're stopping it all the flippin' time anyway, why not just leave it turn-based so the player doesn't have to putz around with manually stopping the action every few seconds? It just creates busywork. Similarly, RPGs used to be three-quarter view looking down on a party of characters. Now you can look out through your character's eyes and get a more immersive experience, but what did we lose in that change? You can't run a party of characters anymore. You have to trust additional party members to idiot AI that constantly mis-uses their skills and/or gets them killed. Also, if you only have one character, no lock can be very difficult to pick because your party no longer has a dedicated thief. Your party no longer has a healer casting restorative spells, so you have to take time out to do that to yourself or drink potions. Etc., etc. Personally, I would love to a see a come-back of party-based RPGs because they were so much richer in terms of gameplay. But, as always, the gaming field tends ever towards dumber and more action-oriented games.

Topics like this were not banned because they were considered evil. They were banned because the endless discussion from primarily uninformed people was repetitious, leading nowhere, and clogging up the forum. Once a modder demonstrated a feasible method rather than merely talking about it ad nauseum, Squad was flexible enough to change their minds on the subject.