• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,618 Excellent


About Pecan

  • Rank
    Dres Holiday Rep

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Is the very reason I say no game is worth buying for $60; I expect to buy better for less than half the price.
  2. Corporate Espionage, also known as industrial spying or, in KSP, starting a sandbox game so you can develop, test and improve your vehicles for free, only 'stealing' the most cost-effective designs to launch in your career save. Really good to hear how well you're doing though. Hope you're really enjoying your hard-earned skills :-)
  3. KSP 2: Pro, it'll be newer than KSP 1, include interstellar travel and more colony-building. Con, it doesn't exist. Price $60 can't be justified. Buy it if you want the new shiny stuff with new shiny bugs, don't care when it comes or what it costs. KSP 1: Pro, It's been constantly improved for 5 years, has thousands of hours of content and more thousands of mods, including interstellar travel and colony-building. Con, the graphics have never been leading-edge and it's still a bit buggy. Price $30, plus DLC, is hard to justify to be honest, but it's often on sale for a lot less. Unfortunately, you've just missed a 75% discount in the Steam sale, for instance. Buy it on sale for everything time and the modding community can do to polish it then decide in a year or two if you want to upgrade to KSP 2 - by which time it should also be on sale.
  4. Kerbal Space Program has changed over the years to make SSTOs easier and easier. The simplest is just 3 parts and can launch a considerable amount.
  5. In theory we're all stars, in practice we're all stardust.
  6. The problem is it just can't cope with Kerbin gravity. Some struts and/or autostrutting may help but I can't really see what the overall structure is meant to be like anyway.
  7. It's not like the files are locked in some magical way, just that there's no readily-available reader that makes them easily comprehensible. Compliments on the avatar image. A fine looking yacht.
  8. That would come down to what he means by mapping and to what resolution. It's in the same category as asking what the length of an earth coastline is (coasts are fractal so you get a longer and longer answer depending on the amount of detail you look for). By the same token - would that person say we've "mapped" the Amazon basin? Yes, a single satellite in a (near) polar orbit will cover an entire body, as long as it isn't in a resonant orbit (orbiting 'in time' with the body, which would mean it keeps covering the same paths). It does usually take several orbits though, depending on its field of view - the amount of the surface it can 'see' on each pass. Then there's the matter of what type of mapping you're after. For instance, I used to be friends with one of the team who were radar-mapping Mars. Does a complete height-map count as 'mapped'? Would a complete set of ordinary photographs count as 'mapped' if they were at 10km resolution? Anyway: +1 for Scansat in KSP.
  9. Did you use Navball Docking Alignment Indicator ? There are, as my old Sergeant Major told me, no extra points for doing it the hard way - I'm just asking what you thought of the mod, if you used it. Just for anyone who isn't aware, it's one I always recommend, as Snark does.
  10. At 30 you're on the younger side of all computer games players (just). Eg; Polygon (2016 but I haven't got time to look for a newer figure) "The average guy who plays games is 35; the average woman is 44" (
  11. Seems like a very reasonable result to me, there's no benefit to a pad-landing so no reason to make it harder than it needs to be.
  12. Why does anyone start on career, with its added complications of strategies, contracts, reputation, costs, recruting, deaths, deadlines? Start with sandbox and get to know how things work or, if you need a more directed 'game' start with science.
  13. @Laie has completely covered it for every rocket you will ever build, not just asparagus. Except that it's all a bit more complicated for a launch vehicle (everything is). i) Only your first stage will use sea-level ISP and thrust so if you're trying to be completely accurate ... have fun, no one else is. ii) Drag, especially with very wide designs (more than one tier around the core), iii) Steering losses on gravity turn But there are slightly easier ways ... Just build it and believe what KSP tells you in the VAB Use KER/MJ and believe their estimates Make-up a 'dV to orbit' figure, launch your design and add the remaining dV in orbit to the number you first thought of