I am stuck in a rut.

[Vanamonde]

Building small is its own kind of challenge. For example, this is the smallest thing I have ever flown to orbit.

[Whackjob]

My tiny munar lander on the pad:

[NovaSilisko]

What FAR does is change the aerodynamics to more closely represent reality. A side-effect is that it takes like 1000 less delta-v to reach orbit because KSP's default system makes atmospheres unreasonably thick.

But that doesn't strictly mean it's "easier" since your rockets are subject to atmospheric effects that aren't modeled in the normal game. Effects that tend to make unaerodynamic things flip out and blow up. I think it's worth giving a shot.

Exactly. Four times easier to get into orbit if they're aerodynamic. Plus, RealSolarSystem is a totally new beast. The wobbly joints might be a killer though... but I'd say it's worth a shot. Especially if you don't rescale things and stick to stock stats.

[Whackjob]

Ok, tell yas what. I'll try both far and real solar. Tomorrow morning.

For tonight, I'll crash out. Gnite!

[SpaceSphereOfDeath]

My tiny munar lander on the pad

How did you get fuel lines to work with those parts, I've built a 0.5m Mün lander without fuel lines and built it in orbit, when I tried fuel lines, say asparagus style, the first pair dropped fine and the second, but just before the second pair dropped the fuel lines 'switched' and the middle stack drained. It's really annoying (and yes, I ran them from bottom to top)

[FenrirWolf]

Yeah if you're doing Real Solar System, then you'll need something like 8-9000k delta-v just to reach orbit. It's pretty nuts

[NovaSilisko]

FAR has the added bonus of, if you go too far away from prograde while going really fast in atmosphere, you'll be wrenched from your present orientation and flipped around into a billion pieces. It's quite enjoyable.

[Markus Reese]

Gnite! The FAR also promotes more complex rockets. Check my sig for the link to my Kerbal video. I roleplayed the Aerodynamics. it sorta gets into the whole make the mission more engaging. Back in 0.19, it would have been easier to build and launch a rocket as one big mass without all the cones and complex shapes. But for the roleplay, was the most fun I had. Also it took me a fair while to do the mission. The actual rescue was needed from when I did oops an atmo burn around Eve. Because of my comp specs, I did have to slightly mod the save file to reduce ship size a little bit. Was real good fun.

I do have a bit of a long (and badly voiced over by me) intro into the video. Can skip to the musical portions by this link instead. Starts with IVA of Lars Kerman's ship "crashed landed" on eve. I did the vid as a story to show the dramatic tech evolution if KSP from 0.17 to 0.19 but represents how I pretty much do all of my missions.

http://youtu.be/OLDXaEyR_LM?t=2m37s

[breakthrough]

I think you should probably go play your next most favorite genre for awhile rather than ruin your enjoyment of an awesome game. If it works anything like RTS games did for me, you'll come back after a little break and suddenly find you have ideas 10x better than you did before just by coming at it with fresh eyes.

[ferram4]

Exactly. Four times easier to get into orbit if they're aerodynamic. Plus, RealSolarSystem is a totally new beast. The wobbly joints might be a killer though... but I'd say it's worth a shot. Especially if you don't rescale things and stick to stock stats.

It's not four times easier to get to orbit, not by a long shot. Unless you consider 4.5 km/s dV to be four times harder to get to than 3.7 - 3.5 km/s.

Ok, tell yas what. I'll try both far and real solar. Tomorrow morning.

For tonight, I'll crash out. Gnite!

Add Deadly Reentry to that list with this thrown into a config file somewhere in GameData:

@PART[0625_Heatshield]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{

		@direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		@reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		@ablative = AblativeShielding
		@loss
		{ // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
			@key,0 = 650 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
			@key,1 = 2000 40 // peak ablation at 2000 degrees C
			@key,2 = 5000 50 // max ablation at 5000 degrees C
		}
		@dissipation
		{ // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
				@key,0 = 300 0 // begin ablating at 300 degrees C
				@key,1 = 800 1920 // maximum dissipation at 800 degrees C
		}
	}
}

@PART[1.25_Heatshield]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{

		@direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		@reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		@ablative = AblativeShielding
		@loss
		{ // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
			@key,0 = 650 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
			@key,1 = 2000 160 // peak ablation at 2000 degrees C
			@key,2 = 5000 200 // max ablation at 5000 degrees C
		}
		@dissipation
		{ // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
				@key,0 = 300 0 // begin ablating at 300 degrees C
				@key,1 = 800 480 // maximum dissipation at 800 degrees C
		}
	}
}

@PART[2.5_Heatshield]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{

		@direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		@reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		@ablative = AblativeShielding
		@loss
		{ // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
			@key,0 = 650 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
			@key,1 = 2000 568 // peak ablation at 2000 degrees C
			@key,2 = 6000 710 // max ablation at 6000 degrees C
		}
		@dissipation
		{ // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
				@key,0 = 300 0 // begin ablating at 300 degrees C
				@key,1 = 800 140 // maximum dissipation at 800 degrees C
		}
	}
}

@PART[3.75_Heatshield]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{

		@direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		@reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		@ablative = AblativeShielding
		@loss
		{ // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
			@key,0 = 650 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
			@key,1 = 2000 1500 // peak ablation at 2000 degrees C
			@key,2 = 6000 2000 // max ablation at 6000 degrees C
		}
		@dissipation
		{ // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
				@key,0 = 300 0 // begin ablating at 300 degrees C
				@key,1 = 800 50 // maximum dissipation at 800 degrees C
		}
	}
}
@PART[mk1pod]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ModuleHeatShield]
	{ // change the Mk1 Pod heat shield for real-scale Kerbin

		@direction = 0, -1, 0 // bottom of pod
		@reflective = 0.05 // 5% of heat is ignored at correct angle
		@ablative = AblativeShielding
		@loss
		{ // loss is based on the shockwave temperature (also based on density)
			@key,0 = 650 0 // start ablating at 650 degrees C
			@key,1 = 2000 160 // peak ablation at 2000 degrees C
			@key,2 = 5000 200 // max ablation at 5000 degrees C
		}
		@dissipation
		{ // dissipation is based on the part's current temperature
				@key,0 = 300 0 // begin ablating at 300 degrees C
				@key,1 = 800 480 // maximum dissipation at 800 degrees C
		}
	}
}

^That's taken from the Realism Overhaul stuff, but it doesn't scale the masses or the size of the part, just the heat shield behavior so that it works with RSS. What adding DRE will do is it'll prevent you from fully "taking advantage" of FAR's slippery atmosphere because it'll melt you first.

[NovaSilisko]

It's not four times easier to get to orbit, not by a long shot. Unless you consider 4.5 km/s dV to be four times harder to get to than 3.7 - 3.5 km/s.

Sorry, just was quoting what had been said. Only ever really used it with RSS so I wouldn't know firsthand...

[SkyHook]

-redacted-

Edited January 5, 2014 by SkyHook

[ferram4]

Sorry, just was quoting what had been said. Only ever really used it with RSS so I wouldn't know firsthand...

Meh, it's more that I dislike bad numbers being thrown around. Especially since FAR actually does decrease the dV requirements for orbit a bit, it's one of those things that leads to the standard, "mods are cheating / cheap," kind of arguments if the numbers aren't correct. No worries man.

...and now I'm trying to rush v0.12.5 out the door so Whackjob (and any imitators) doesn't run into all the issues I've fixed.

[NovaSilisko]

Meh, it's more that I dislike bad numbers being thrown around. Especially since FAR actually does decrease the dV requirements for orbit a bit, it's one of those things that leads to the standard, "mods are cheating / cheap," kind of arguments if the numbers aren't correct. No worries man.

No, I agree totally. Incorrect information/statistics bugs the hell out of me too!

[ZodiaK]

two words: Dyson Sphere

[3mon]

Make a legendary grand tour ship (and i mean legendary by your standards ) and go see how many planets you can land on before returning home! (without Kethane for bonus voyage epicness )

[steelgrey]

Well I am at the opposite end of the scale, I've only been playing since 26th December. Before getting the game I watched a lot of Youtube videos to give me an idea of what to expect from the game. Anyway I started out in sandbox mode and couldn't get my head around all the different parts, it was all too much. I made a few ships but other than just building ship after ship I wasn't sure what direction to take and felt a little lost. So I restarted in career mode and it all began to make sense to me then. Having limitations on available parts in my opinion makes the game more enjoyable and gives you goals. It will be good when they flesh out career mode some more and we have to actually buy parts, you'll really have to think then about building and the costs. Hopefully they'll also add in G-Force effects on the Kerbins, and oxygen supplies, food , water etc. Planning a mission to another planet would be much more in depth if you had to take supplies with you to survive, and not taking enough could mean you lose Kerbins which might impact other parts of the game, like recruitment for instance.

[Arran]

There are moments i play KSP for days, even weeks in a row, then times i hardly touch the game..

TBH i hardly played KSP on between the release of 0.22 and only picked it up again at 0.23 release, just because i needed to give it a rest or i would start to dislike the game..

Allways amazed how "dedicated" some people are playing one game constantly, i can bring this up myself, and have to play several games..

Currently i'm playing again alot of Skyrim and Planet Explorers, and playing other games often give me bright idears again for KSP to try, and then i start to play the game again..

In my language there is an old saying "Verandering van spijs doet eten" litterly translated, "Change of meals makes you eat" what really applies to me with games

[Seret]

In my language there is an old saying "Verandering van spijs doet eten" litterly translated, "Change of meals makes you eat" what really applies to me with games

In English that's said: "variety is the spice of life". Couldn't agree more.

[JiWint]

I was bored of ksp like a few days ago,but some posts and Gurren Laggan hooked me up again

Actually there are times when you just get bored by computer games

[tntristan12]

Don't just mine Kethane. Mine *all* the Kethane! Do a grand tour where not only do you visit every planet, but every Kethane deposit *on* every planet, and suck the entire solar system dry in one glorious journey.

[SpaceSphereOfDeath]

Don't just mine Kethane. Mine *all* the Kethane! Do a grand tour where not only do you visit every planet, but every Kethane deposit *on* every planet, and suck the entire solar system dry in one glorious journey.

He would, need a mainsail to BURN the fuel

[Spartwo]

I'd say take a break,I started playing FTL instead.

[Rainbow-Dashie]

Build a giant rubber ducky and fly it to the Mun!

[Madrias]

I've had this issue in the past myself, where I find myself burnt out on KSP.

My latest craze has been using Firespitter to make interesting propeller planes, then launch them into space.