HoustonDave

Yup. I'm running ATM Basic, but I am unsure whether it ran properly. I did not get an extended blank screen it says I would on first run. EDIT: BTW, You were absolutely correct. I verified that Active Texture Management had not properly run on startup, and determined I botched something on my copy order. I deleted that folder and Texture Replacer, recopied the Active Texture Management, recopied Texture Replacer, and then recopied Renaissance's Texture Replacer files over those, and it now works perfectly. PS I wasn't actually seeking help, but responding to the other poster in hopes he could get useful info from my similar experience. :-)

Had been running .23 and updated to .235 yesterday. Began installing mods piecemeal. No issues until I tried to install Renaissance Pack and Texture Replacer. It began crashing to desktop while trying to load. I'm running 64 bit and watched my RAM use, which passed 4GB with no issues. Deleted the TR files and no problem. Began adding back in one folder at a time. The dll, config files no problem. Suits directory no problem Heads directory no problem PluginData directory no problem EnvMap directory no problem Default directory crashes to desktop. It appears to be the surface map pngs that are doing it. Added in the other graphics (but not the maps) and still getting 90% of Renaissance Pack working with no crashing. Have not added the Squad sub directory back in yet. Will test those out later and start testing individual files of the maps. I know for sure KerbinScaledSpace300.png crashes it.

Thank you both. Much obliged.

I'm looking for a modest improvement in KSP performance. I just upgraded from a slug of a computer to the following system: -CPU Intel Core i3-4330 processor -Gigabyte GA-H87-D3H mobo -8 GB Kingston Hyper DDR3 -Ubuntu 12.04 OS / Windows 7 Dual Boot on an SSD Note that I have KSP running on the Linux side, since it has almost no other software loading at boot and is running very lean. The i3 has given me a huge improvement on frame rates at max physics settings and graphics settings, even using the integrated graphics, but I'd like to add an entry-level graphics card (new or used) and see if I can bump performance up a bit more. I'm interested in a sub-$100 card that plays well with Linux and will give me a marginal improvement in KSP. If that's asking too much for that price range, please let me know. Thanks!

I'm still running KSP 0.23 Linux. Can someone confirm which version I should download for compatibility with that build of KSP? Is the latest 1.4.1 backward compatible to 0.23? EDIT: Answered. Thank you kindly, Shaw. Much obliged.

EDIT: Ignore. Posted to wrong thread.

I just upgraded my system from a 7-year-old HP AMD Athlon 2.x GHz Dual Core with 3GB RAM, to the following system: Intel Core i3-4330 Dual Core Processor 3.5GHz Gigabyte H87 LGA 1150 MOBO 8GB RAM Samsung 840 EVO SSD Mobo graphics only, no graphics card. Installed Ubuntu and KSP stock 23.0 on it with no other software or mods. Would you like me to run a benchmark on it? It makes the HP look like a slug. ;-)

When doing your burn, make sure you time it so half is before and half after the node. So if the calculated burn is 50 seconds, start it 25 seconds before the node and finish 25 seconds after the node.

I would not say that OP is a troll, nor that it was a troll post. I submit to you their post on another thread just prior to this one: OP stated in this thread that they had played "over 200 hours" in less than five days. Using remote tech no less. Clearly OP had just come off a multi day binge and beaten the game into submission with their own two hands. They were filled with the sleep-deprived an righteous fire of An True Believer, cleansed by the fireballs of countless unplanned spontaneous disassemblies, belief tempered and honed by the mercilous vacuum of space.

You, sir, are a minor demi-diety for pursuing this. How awesomely groovy.

Can you describe the orientation of the two pieces? Is it an engine with an accent piece on top, or on the side?

New player here, so I'm your target audience, and I'm going to provide a couple of answers to your question instead of getting my back up or snarling. 1) I'm in my 40s with a full time job, wife, and kids. I started playing about 8 weeks ago. 2) Started vanilla career mode, watched Manley, read forums, figured out some basics. 3) Added Kerbal Engineer first week. 4) Added Mechjeb second week. 5) Reason #1 I think MJ was a reasonable move for me as a newbie is, I don't have the time to manually do the things I want to do in-game AND work AND take care of family obligations. With MJ I can spend an hour planning a mission and designing the equipment, launch, set a maneuver node, execute, and go help my kids do their homework. Check back a few minutes later to make sure MJ hasn't had a seizure, set up next maneuver, back to obligations. Repeat a few times. Check back 30 later, spend an hour exploring Duna "FOR SCIENCE" (!). It allows me to play within the time I have available. Otherwise I couldn't play this game at all, frankly. And I really enjoy it. 6) I'm learning what MJ does and why, through its running commentary, and learning how I can do better than it. Many times I let it start a maneuver and, if I have time, take over and do it more efficiently. And I also tend to set up my own maneuvers now, rather than let MJ do it, because I have learned what it is doing and can do so better in some cases. Simply put, there are good reasons for many players to use MJ early in the learning curve, but there are good reasons not to lean on it for everything too. It's just another flight tool at your disposal.

Now that is not something I ever considered. What a brilliant idea. Dummy tanks below the first stage engines for clamping purposes. Just wow.

Most excellent. Perfect. Thank you.

You win. ;-)