ArmchairGravy

Done.

I've not noticed it on other engines, but I'm not deep into the tree on this save yet.

Did this update break Hammer solid fuel engines for anyone else? I have a pod on a Hammer, I've adjusted the thrust limiter to where the engineer report says TWR of 1.6, and it's just sitting on the launch pad when ignited.

My tips for large ships: As few parts as possible Pull with the thrust rather than push Large docking ports only for thrust-bearing couplings Reaction wheels active only on main body Disable RCS on parts docked to main body Low thrust Struts to stabilize main body Getting the main body correct is the key to larger ships. Your vessel should not need RCS to turn when assembled. It will be way more delicate due to the couplers, so slowly ramp up the thrust. I initially turn my thrust limiters down so I don't put too much strain on the couplers. Then I save and experiment to find out how hard I can push it. Finally, assembled craft are more stable if they're pulling rather than pushing. Put the drive engines at the top and have them pull the rest of the craft along.

Good, I'll have to go +1 this. Makes a darn good little rover. Shame it falls apart.

I do a custom game and max out all of the sliders, but I still think a) there's not enough biomes per planet and b) the cost scaling of the tree is nuts. I don't care what you're doing, 1800 a whack adds up quick. I'll never get into late game because I have other things to do besides scrape every nook and cranny for points. On the very easiest of settings.

Reported Version: v0.2.1 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 11 | CPU: i7-8700 @3.2GHz | GPU: GeForce 1050Ti | RAM: 16GB Hammer engine shows TWR of 1.65, but when launched it does not leave pad.

In the immortal words of Wayne Newton, "Danke scheon".

I'm firmly on the fence with ComNet. I do like the ease of play of coms being strictly range-based. I also liked the challenge of linking the network. I would most definitely like a visual representation of coms.

I squint in your general direction. We here at Porcine Avionics have an avowed interest in being as inefficient as possible!

This is the first time since .1 I'm having more fun than frustrations. I'm playing both Sandbox and Exploration, and I am very happy with what the team delivered in the .2 update. I am impressed at how few additional bugs were introduced, and how many long-term bugs have been eliminated or ameliorated. The UI is in dire need of an overhaul. The more I progress in the game the worse it gets. Why isn't there an alarm clock and transfer window/angle calculator in the Tracking Station? Why don't I have access to advanced orbital characteristics? You want to improve the initial user experience. You want them to use external sources to access basic knowledge. That's contradictory. Put the info in there, somewhere. I don't care if it's pretty as long as I can read it. Overall, I'll give the team a "That'll do, pig" for .20 and I look forward to seeing what 2024 brings.

My launch profiles vary widely depending of what's leaving Kerbin, especially with heat. Small, hardy vehicles hit apogee at 75km at 1400m/s. Space stations and such hit 90 km apogee at 750m/s because I have to take them way up slowly before getting off of vertical. If there's dv and a positive TWR, it can get to orbit.

The physics loading at transitions still needs work, for sure. Exiting a craft, landing near a craft, switching between craft, all cause phantom physics. It has gotten better than "launch 80 meters" or "deorbit the craft".

This isn't entirely useful. I have the target locked, but no idea of which PE is which.

Compare to KSP1 The only information on the screen is the stuff I need to know now.

I just have to ask, what are you worried about being spoiled? I mean everyone already knows at the end Bob ends up being Jeb's father.

I'm enjoying the heat physics. Seeing a craft lit up like a Christmas tree because of heat transfer between parts makes aerobraking way more entertaining. I'd show the neat picture except I lost it somewhere. Having to adjust launch profiles depending on the delicacy of the part is EXACTLY what I want to see! There needs to be a "too hot" animation for the Kerbalnauts when their entire craft is glowing red. The cooldowns need tweaked a teensy bit. Seriously, just a smidge. Heat is hard to dissipate. This thermal system is currently pretty darn good. It's way better than I expected it to be as an initial implementation.

There is currently a massive lack of information for new users to be able to really effectively play the game. You've simplified the UI by discarding the ability to access the deeper knowledge of the game. I would like to know my latitude, longitude, eccentricity, inclination, and angles of peri/api because I'm able to use this information because it was there for me to learn how it matters. New players shouldn't have to access the web for a transfer window calculator. That should be in the tracking station and it should show the math. Not force you to learn it, but be there so you can. But first it has to be there, somewhere and not as a mod. There is too much clutter on the map screen. Icons need to be toggled off. The persistent Apo/Peri markers should be replaced by colored dots. Green for apoapsis, red for periapsis. If I mouse over the marker, then expand the dot and let me lock it. We need the station/probe/rover icons back so we can tell at a glance what's where. The flight cameras are wonky, to say the least.

I'm going back to the original: Dessert Topping.

Agreed. I play on Easy because I have things to do and planets to see. I hate it when people try to make the game so realistic all of the fun gets sucked out of it. This is a game about putting rockets on planets. Some people like to put the teeniest, most efficient rockets on the most effective course to get to the planet. I like to put a few onion stacks around a Mainsail and yeehaw all the way to the planet. There is a bitter, ongoing, decade-long dispute between the two camps and the devs have always been caught in the crossfire.

We do not have random parts failures as a game system. We have a bunch of bugs that emulate a random parts failure system.

Sheet Ice, Artice Ice, Snowdrift, Crater. Yeah, it's officially ice. Maybe the precursors built a big freezer then left the door open.

For interplanetary travel I'm currently using https://ksp.olex.biz/ coupled with my eyeballs to roughly estimate when I have a window and how to fly through it.

I'm experiencing some bugs. Reloading fixes some of them. However, after working my way up the tech tree where I have tier 2 pretty much unlocked, I have to admit I'm finally having a pretty good time. I see a lot that need tweaked, a lot has been fixed, and some of the stubborn bugs have been ameliorated. Well done, devs. Have a happy holiday season! I'll be sending Tim to the North Pole via rover.

Here's an example of bad UI: The box color with the text color means I can't see what's being typed.