Grumman

I launched a probe-controlled ship into orbit for a mission, then decided to deorbit it. Unfortunately, everything except the probe core exploded, and now the probe core is just rolling all over the place. I can't recover the core, because it's rolling. I can't stop it rolling, because it has no reaction wheels. I can't return to the KSC without reverting to before the launch. Is there a solution?

That is incorrect. To turn it off for orange suits, I believe you need to go to GameData/UmbraSpaceIndustries/LifeSupport/Settings.cfg and change NoSupplyEffectVeterans to 0.

Unless the wiki is wrong, the hab multiplier can only produce longer - but still finite - kerbal-month habitation times before things go wrong. That is not what I am asking for. If it takes X months for a Kerbal to reach 100% unhappiness, the Kerbal is gaining 1/X unhappiness per month (the red line). Unhappiness gained per month is always positive, with the rate only reaching 0 at infinite Hab-months per Kerbal. Multiplying the effective number of hab-months per Kerbal can never reach infinity, so the Kerbal is always getting more unhappy. The purpose of the offset is to allow something like the blue line, where the rate reaches 0 at a finite number of effective Hab-months per Kerbal (in this case at 21 Hab-months per Kerbal for Offset = 0.05). Under this system, it is possible to build something like an orbital hotel where Kerbals can go to become less homesick, instead of Kerbin being the only place in the entire system where that is possible.

I have two questions: 1. According to the wiki, if I turn off wear & tear in USI-LS's configuration, UKS will turn it back on. Can I counteract this by turning it off in UKS's USI-LS.cfg file as well? 2. Would you be willing to extend the formula for the rate at which unhappiness accumulates to allow for more complex behaviour? At the moment, your formula appears to be something along the lines of: (monthly unhappiness) = NoOfKerbals / (Hab-months * BaseHabTime) What I would like is if the rate was instead: (monthly unhappiness) = (NoOfKerbals + Offset) / (Hab-months * BaseHabTime) - Offset ...with Offset defined in the config file. If Offset = 0, unhappiness is accrued at the same rate it is now. But if someone set Offset to greater than 0, then it is possible to create a sufficiently large space station in which Kerbals could live indefinitely or even lose unhappiness without returning to Kerbin, with the threshold being ((1/Offset) + 1) Hab-months per Kerbal. An offset of 0.02 (i.e. 1/50) requires 51 Hab-months per Kerbal, an offset of 0.05 (i.e. 1/20) requires 21 Hab-months per Kerbal, and so on.

Wrong thread.

This looks interesting. As someone whose dream program has always been the Laythe mothership, I'll have add a few of these to the eventual roster.

If it works, you have my thanks. TextureReplacer, along with Chatterer, is one of my favourite "flavour" mods.

Thanks for the swift release. I've performed a quick mission with it installed and it seems to be working fine so far.

That appears to be correct - after further testing, neither the wheelless Pack Rat nor a Pack Rat with the stock wheels (but not attached to the nodes) explodes.

I just tried spawning a Pack Rat on the runway (wheels down), and it spontaneously exploded. I tried three times, and it exploded every time. I'll play around with it a bit and see if I can find the problem, but if anyone else is having the same problem, you may want to chime in. Further attempts on both the runway and launch pad had similar results. The problem seems to be some kind of phantom force that shoves the parts around in a destructive manner.

Yes, they can grab the end of a winch and carry it around. This is useful if you want them to connect the winch into a socket on another craft, or you can use it as an EVA tether so your Kerbal can't drift away.

Chatterer and Texture Replacer are two mods I recommend for flavour. - Chatterer adds some atmospheric sounds to the game in the form of radio chatter for Kerballed spaceships and your choice of beeps for probe cores. -Texture Replacer allows you to replace the standard Kerbal skins with more varied skins. For example, it lets you assign different coloured space suits to your pilots, your scientists and your engineers, and give different Kerbals different skin and hair colours.

How about being able to mine a resource for science? We've already got abstracted small samples in the form of Surface Samples and Asteroid Samples, but how about being able to dig up a ton or two of Munar regolith for bigger experiments like its possible use for construction, either on Kerbin (recovered for science instead of kerbucks) or in a mobile laboratory?

Better that than Mount Ohgodthatsnotacloud.

I would suggest evacuating the crews back to Kerbin, but leaving infrastructure where it is. That way, if anything breaks you're not losing anything important, and it's an interesting challenge to pass the time until 1.1 gets here.

I've modded my game to give the Mk 2 crew cabin an impact tolerance more in line with the other Mk 2 parts instead of its current pitiful 6 m/s, and it would be nice if a similar change came to the stock game.

If you have enough energy to build a Dyson sphere, you have enough energy that you don't need a Dyson sphere.

Caves cannot be implemented with a single heightmap, but it would be possible to do so by a number of other methods. You could create a canyon and then add a mesh to form the roof, you could create a canyon and use a pair of smaller heightmaps with a transparency layer to form the roof, or if you only want basic overhangs you could use procedural generation to deform the heightmap.

I dislike this idea. I would much prefer to be able to harvest Xenon from Jool's atmosphere - a cool idea in a cool location - rather than deliberately putting it somewhere that nobody likes going.

If I was going to add N-body simulation, I would only apply secondary gravitational forces that are at least, say, 25% of the largest. This would allow for the creation of stable orbits anywhere sufficiently close to the celestial body that other bodies will not reach that 25% threshold, but would also create a more dynamic zone of instability than currently exists, where your orbit is unchanged as long as you don't hit the moon's exclusive sphere of influence.

I like the idea, and I would also not make them work exactly like Tourists. Instead of just being ballast, I'd give them the limited ability to do work. For example: Level 0: Tourist, but can go on EVA. Level 1: Counts as a level 0 Engineer, but can't provide control to a ship. Level 2: Counts as a level 1 Engineer and level 0 Scientist, but can't provide control to a a ship. Level 3: Counts as a level 2 Engineer and level 1 Scientist, and can provide control to a ship like a probe core does (meaning they need radio contact with someone who knows what they're doing). This way, you could have colonies that actually do things like operate greenhouses or science laboratories.

What we don't want is quick updates that break things. If the game is "strictly better" after the change, then do it immediately. Adding a new part, for example, does not break people's savegames or spacecraft (unless you happen to give the new part the same name as an existing mod part). Doing things like nerfing parachutes or adding life support requirements does break people's savegames, and so should not be done lightly.

Without having played it, I'd still say that SimpleRockets fills a niche that KSP cannot, even if it is clearly a spiritual successor of sorts. KSP is a resource-intensive game, so making a KSP Light that can run on a phone is a good idea.

Two situations: suborbital on Kerbin (even if it's not the only goal, it means you can do part of the contract now, get paid, and do the second part later), and also if you wanted to jettison something to hit the body. So you could justify it if you tried hard enough - if some eccentric Kerbillionaire wanted to send his pet goldfish's ashes into the sun, you could spawn a small box that counts as debris outside the airlock once you're on a suborbital course and powered down.

This is already done better by stock: the further away your craft is from the KSC runway or launch pad, the more money you lose to recovery costs. If you don't like this implementation, there's nothing stopping you from installing KAS and building your own cargo plane to go retrieve landed pods yourself. There is already a mod that adds construction time, though I do not use it. Your other idea is just tedious busywork. As long as you can skip it, this could be a cool little addition to the game. The only way I would want to see random failure implemented is by giving each individual part a random, hidden amount of extra durability. Random failure should not be a matter of "the RNG rolled a 1, stranding your crew on the Mun", it should be "you pushed your nuclear engines to 120% of the safe temperature, and this particular nuke was only 115% reliable." Experimental parts unlocked by contracts are the only time I would support failure before you reached the recommended thresholds, and would be accomplished with a negative modifier of up to 20%. The Vernor engine is already part of stock.