Superfluous J's post in How to use a Delta-V map. was marked as the answer
FIRST NOTE: These numbers are suggestions and will vary in reality based on your skill, rocket, and how you do each burn. But given a typical rocket and correct burns, they should be pretty close. I like to keep a 10% margin for error in my tank, especially for landing on airless worlds.
You need to think of the map in sections. There's a "get into orbit or land from orbit" section of flight, a "circularize orbit from interplanetary or go from circular orbit to interplanetary" section. Each trip includes one or more of these and they're not all together.
Let's take a simple one, getting to Mun. First you get into orbit (3400m/s, which I'll skip from now on and assume we're in orbit of Kerbin to start) and then there's the "go to Mun from circular orbit" which is 860. When you're done with that burn, you should have a periapsis around Mun at around 14km. You won't, but a tiny mid-course correction should do it. Then when you're at that Pe you need to do the "circularize at mun" burn which is 280. Then to land from there you need 580.
Reversing that, you need 580 to orbit Mun, 280 to eject back to kerbin, 860 to brake at Kerbin back into a circular orbit, and 3400 to land back at Kerbin. However, those last 2 can utilize aerobraking so you can do them all for free, assuming you can stand the heat
Okay now for the harder part (don't worry it's not much harder), getting to Duna. Duna has more numbers than Mun after the initial 3400 to reach orbit. you've got 930, 130, a little '10' off of that 130, 250, 360, and finally 1450. Whew, what to do?
Remember, there are only 2 actual ways to spend fuel: landing/takoff, or circularize/eject. So, we're in orbit of Kerbin and we want to eject to Duna, so we just add up all the numbers to achieve that. Note the little flyby icon in the Mun trip we did. We want to add all the numbers to Duna that reach that same flyby icon. That's 930 + 130 or 1060. You do that burn (at the right time and in the right direction) and your ship will encounter Duna, or at least be really close, and you may need up to 10m/s mid-course to fix your angle. You also will need a tiny bit to tweak your flyby so your periapsis is 60km away.
Now you're at that Pe and you want to circularize, so you need to burn 250+360 to do that. if all you want to do is get into ANY orbit (say, you're going to Ike instead of Duna) you'd need to at least burn 250. But to land on Duna, you need an extra 360. You do those at once though so need 610, but if you're daring you can use Duna's atmosphere to do them for you.
Then to land you need 1450, though really you can do it for almost nothing and let the air slow you down most of the way. Returning, though, you need 1450 to get back into orbit, 610 to eject back to Kerbin, 1060 to slow down at Kerbin back into a circular orbit, and 3400 to land at kerbin. As before, those last 2 can be reduced to almost 0 via aerobraking.
And that's basically it, all other planets are similar to Duna.
Superfluous J's post in What happens when you take measurements and scince in interstellar space in Stock? was marked as the answer
Pretty much what happens anywhere else. You get a little message and a science report with some points that you can transmit, bring home, or stuff in a lab.
Superfluous J's post in Control with non-pilot and probe core was marked as the answer
Without comms, an Engineer plus a probe core can do everything a pilot can do, except make and delete maneuver nodes. The probe gives you the ability to turn on/off SAS, while the Kerbals give you the ability to aim any direction you want.
I do this all the time sending and engineer + scientist down to the surface to lay out the Breaking Ground science doodads.
Superfluous J's post in EVA Construction - connecting fuel lines between craft was marked as the answer
Or a docking port, yes.
Superfluous J's post in How to achieve the highest possible apoapsis from Kerbol? was marked as the answer
You don't need to flyby Jool. You just need to burn until your "orbit" around Sun is not an ellipse anymore, and then turn around and with VERY light taps, burn back until it's an ellipse. Once your Ap is past Jool it takes less and less dV (at your Sun Pe which is hopefully also in LKO).
If you DO want to do a flyby of Jool then yes lower is better, and if the encounter itself doesn't give you a hyperbolic Sun orbit then you should do the burn at Jool's Pe. But again, that is 100% not necessary and may even cost more fuel for all I know.
Note, though, that - mathematically speaking - the "highest possible" Ap over Sun is infinity. Practically speaking you'll at some point not be able to expend a low enough puff of exhaust to not send your Ap from "really high but not yet infinite" to "oops now we're hyperbolic again"
Superfluous J's post in What's the best mod to transfer to another spacecraft? was marked as the answer
Close by, [ and] do it in stock.
The only mod I can think of is Targetron, but I don't use it so can't really speak on it.
Superfluous J's post in what is the most efficient method to intercept a planet? was marked as the answer
Exactly. Also, at the right time and in the right place.
Superfluous J's post in Transfer Science between ships was marked as the answer
One caveat, you sometimes have to be ridiculously close to the Science Jr (In particular) to take the data. They upped the range but there have been times when I had to stick my kerbal's head inside that thing to get the button in the part action window.
Superfluous J's post in How do I disable the ?questionmarks? was marked as the answer
If you put your mouse up in the top middle of the screen a filter will drop down. You can turn on and off each vessel type. Included in "vessel type" is unknown objects, aka asteroids (and possibly soon to also include comets).
Superfluous J's post in Polar Orbits -- why does a larger orbit = less fuel needed? was marked as the answer
When you're higher up (and especially when you're at the top of an elliptical orbit) you are moving slower.
To turn your orbit, you need to basically come to a complete stop, and then do that same burn at a 90 degree angle. Actually it's 2 of that (not 2 funds, I'm using that as a square root symbol) because you can do it all in one burn and cut the diagonal. In total, it costs about 1.4 times your orbital speed to shift your direction 90 degrees.
If you're in LKO, you're going 2300 or so m/s so it would cost you about 3250 m/s to turn your orbit 90 degrees.
If you're up at the height of an ellipse well past Minmus' orbit, you may only be going 10-20m/s, so your turn will only cost 15-30m/s or so to turn.
It costs about 950m/s to get that elliptical orbit, and 950m/s to go back down, so instead of burning 3250m/s to shift your orbit 90 degrees you "only" have to burn 950+30+950=1930m/s. That's a savings of 1320m/s.
Superfluous J's post in very long recovery times was marked as the answer
No it was you you listed them here.
They also told you what we'd need to help you there.
But the short of it is, KSP doesn't take that long for anybody else so the problem is not with KSP in general but with your install of it. Therefore while with good information we may be able to help, the problem can only be solved by you.
Superfluous J's post in Planet Ascend/Descend Node was marked as the answer
The nodes of a planet or craft is where your orbital plane crosses theirs and actually doesn't match the planet's equator inherently.
Most planets in KSP have low orbital tilt, so the equator does match the orbital plane in many cases, but Minmus is not one of those cases.
To get a perfectly equatorial orbit in the stock game, I can only think of 3 ways:
Cheat something into an equatorial orbit of Minmus. Accept a contract to put a satellite into an equatorial orbit of Minmus. Accept a contract to rescue someone or something from an equatorial orbit of Minmus. Any of those will give you a reference orbit you can then match with your craft that you want to be equatorial.
There is another option: eyeball it and accept that if you can't tell the difference it doesn't matter
Superfluous J's post in When gravity turning, my prograde pitches up for no reason, and looses control shortly after. was marked as the answer
Your gravity turn is SUPER late. You don't start the turn until you're already going over 100m/s and barely even try to turn until you're well past 10km. If I had to guess, you learned that either from playing before 1.0 or from watching videos from before 1.0 on how to do a gravity turn. Try this instead:
At 50 m/s turn 5 degrees East so you're at 85 degrees East on the navball. When your Ap (Not altitude) is 5km, bring that down to 70 degrees East. When your Ap is 10km, turn 60 degrees East. When your Ap is 15 km, turn 50 degrees. When your Ap is 20 go to 40. When your Ap is 30 go to 30. When your Ap is 40 go to 20. When your Ap is 50 go to 10. When your Ap is 60 go to 0, and leave it there until your Ap goes to your target altitude. I like 80 or 100 usually. The whole time you're doing this, throttle down if you either see heat (flame is fine, only slow down when things start getting heat gauges) or your time to Ap goes over 60 seconds. A good gravity turn does not shove the Ap way ahead of the craft. Note: Throttling down is generally bad and if you're throttling down a ton, redesign your craft to just not have so much power at those stages of flight.
This is not the "best" but it's pretty darn good and gives you an idea of what you should be shooting for instead of what you're doing.
Also, I assume by "up" you mean "South" and that's semi normal. Any small deviations early on tend to get worse and worse as you fly. It's far less noticeable when you turn more strongly as I did above, and to correct it, you just need to "break the arm the other way" and aim a bit North until the prograde marker is back where you want it.
Superfluous J's post in Neil Armstrong Memorial...? was marked as the answer
You can find it yourself with enough checks of Kerbnet
But it's in the Northwest crater, just inside the southern rim. There are 3 large procedural craters vertically North/South, looking like a snowman with a big head that's leaning over to the east a bit. It's just to the west of the middle one.
Superfluous J's post in [Deleted] was marked as the answer
And so it starts, when the people who don't know you can copy your game and play it outside of Steam start posting.
Welcome to the forums, OM3GA. Sorry for your trouble but this has literally been happening for years. There is no practical way to keep Steam from updating and there's no practical way to update a game and not occasionally break a thing or two. For this and many reasons, you should make backups of not just your saves, but the entire game. Lucky for you, you can likely get a valid backup of your save from the folder. in Backups there are some old persistent files. Treat them like tiny fragile golden eggs that if broken will blow up your house, and save them somewhere safe, so if you DO fix your problem you'll have a way to keep playing your game.
Though oddly I don't see a KSP update in Steam (I'd love to get one). What version were you on and what version did you get updated for?
If I had to guess, Loading the KerbalEVA asset isn't what's wrong, it's just the last thing the game did successfully. If you post the ksp.log and output_log.txt (upload them to Dropbox or something) and post a thread in "help with modded installs" maybe someone will be able to help you.
And needless to say I doubt Steam or Squad will give you a refund. Nor should you want one. You won't be able to play anymore if you don't have the game.
Superfluous J's post in How can we disable KSP automatically setting the symmetry mode when placing parts? was marked as the answer
Basically you can't. Symmetry always inherits down and you can't break it except by not using symmetry on the new parts.
What you have to do is place your tanks 3 times in 2-symmetry mode, so the tanks you want wings on will already be in the symmetry mode you want the wings to have.
Or, place the wings twice but not in symmetry mode.
There is a mod named Split Symmetry but I've never used it. But it may help you here.
Superfluous J's post in Editing persistent file to fix the docking port bug was marked as the answer
As far as I know it's the same as it was 6 years ago. Which is a bit sad.
Here's the thread I used last time I had the bug, though it's been quite a while since I did.