arkie87

Unobtanium?

I understand why vertical suicide burns are referred to as such since a slight miscalculation in distance will result in slamming into the ground and instant death. Horizontal "suicide" burns less so, unless an unexpected tall mountain comes up over the horizon.

I might be wrong, but a "suicide" burn is burning vertically as a craft rapidly descends vertically, such that the craft is at altitude 0 m when craft velocity hits 0 m/s. It's not a suicide burn if you are burning horizontally (at least, i dont see why it could be "suicidal")

When escaping any body, burning 100 m/s at periapsis above escape velocity results in more than 100 m/s upon leaving the planet's SoI, due to Oberth effect. When landing on any body, burning at periapsis does not reduce deltaV to below craft's surface velocity. Incidentally, a "suicide burn" is not the most efficient way to land. What's more efficient is to drop periapsis low, and burn retrograde at periapsis, adjusting the angle to cancel gravity until all of your horizontal velocity is gone (the inverse of the most efficient way to take off in atmosphereless bodies). - - - Updated - - - The reason our budget to go places is measured in delta KE and not deltaV is because of the way gravity wells work: they are energy wells and not deltaV wells.

All aboard the hypetrain! Woot Woot!

Kerbal baseball? I'm in...

But you have to drive for ages...and ages

I'm sure nightingale wouldnt mind some help

Interesting. Specific Kinetic Energy: KE = V^2/2 Velocity magnitude: V = sqrt(p^2+n^2) Thus: delta KE = ((p^2+n^2)^0.5)^2/2 - p^2/2 =n^2/2 So yeah, burning normal does not benefit from oberth

Burning normal or radial does increase velocity magnitude (root sum of squares) but it does not benefit from oberth (as you stated). If you dont believe me, get into an orbit as far out as minmus and burn normal/anti-normal. You will leave Kerbin I have two ways i like to think about Oberth effect: Logically: (a) since gravity accelerates you back towards the planet at a rate (it kills m/s per second), you want to climb away as fast as possible to minimize the amount of time you spend in the gravitational influence Mathematically: ( since gravity wells are ENERGY wells rather than (delta) VELOCITY wells, you want to escape with as much energy as possible since kinetic energy is quadratic-- you will end up with more velocity left over. Some applications where Oberth effect has no bearing: basically, anywhere you need a change in velocity (and not a change in energy). For instance, landing. Burning at peripasis provides no boost in efficiency. If your surface velocity is 1000 m/s, you need at least 1000 m/s to land. Oberth effect wont help you. If that makes sense, great. If not, ignore it!

That is similar, except the anomalies are actual anomalies placed there by squad, not randomly generated parts, which have to be found. So replayability is still not there.

I think most of this is beyond the scope of what you could ever hope squad to do (so dont get your hopes up). However, i do agree with some points/fundamental issues with the game: (1) there is no clear victory condition. (2) exploring planets/moons gets boring since they are all basically the same (see )(3) rovers are pointless (other than fun) since (a) on small planets/moons where you could conceivably drive to new biomes, you have no traction and its easier to just hop around ( on large planets/moons you arent going to be driving to more than two biomes (4) mining is not really needed (5) satellites are not really needed However, you got me thinking. I like the idea of finding and recovering artifacts, like you mentioned. These artifacts could be placed on random planets (or one could be placed on each body, though this would be hard since one would be placed on Eve...), and would either have to be spotted visually (they could be their own part that is REALLY shiny) or using a satellite to locate it. I think doing this basically resolves all of these issues (and it should be easy to implement with a mod): (1) The objects would always be placed randomly. This resolves issue #2 since it gives you something new to look for each time you play. I think this is a good compromise since squad cannot make planets themselves more interesting, since it would take forever to create all the terrain etc... (all planets/moons must be procedurally generated). (2) It resolves issue #3 since once you spot the artifact you must recover it. Unless you can target land perfectly and grab the part with a sky crane, you are going to need a rover to drive over and pick it up. (3) it resolves #4 since it gives a purpose to mining, since you might have to fly around the planet/moon a bit until you can find the object (4) it resolve #5 by giving purpose to satellites which can locate said artifacts (if you enable that option or maybe that is only unlocked later in the tech tree) (5) I dont think finding them shoudl give you science boosts. But i do propose, as a victory condition, bringing all of them back to one mothership In all, i think you might be able to hope for someone to write a mode for this. It would be relatively simple. You would need: one SHINY part to find-- the artifact a dll to randomly place them at the start of a new game a UI to tell you how many you have found perhaps a satellite component to scan (which would be much more complicated). EDIT: The more i think about it, the more i think the shiny artifacts should contain a new resource called <insert something clever>. Each artifact, depending on where it is (what planet/moon) etc... will have different amounts of it. Once you collect 100 you win the game. There could be more than one per planet (to make them easier to find visually). What do you think?

Some might interpret steam workshop as including steam achievements. The devs dont want the game to require steam, which they have said multiple times.

Almost positive this is WNTS

Yes, he should really describe what it does since there is no link to it. Otherwise, how are we supposed to know what it does and if its worth it??

I'm a bit confused by this thread. The LVN is already well balanced. If you compare deltaV ratios between optimized LV-N and LV909, you need a pretty big payload to make the LVN worthwhile... no?

I agree, except i like the contracts. It gives me something to do. I wish there was some way for users to make in-game challenges/contracts, which can automatically limit funds, parts, ship size etc...

Are you suggesting that the only requirement for entanglement is for two systems to be in the exact same state at the same time?

No... it's heat transfer.

or better yet, show in the map mode the transfer location, and a button to warp to when you select the body as a target

"Undiscovered Science" has my vote, though "Science Explorer" is also good.

not sure what you mean here? How can you be controlling EVA and ship at the same time?

I agree with your first two statements: But i come to the opposite conclusion: the fact that math works (you cannot prove 1=2) shows that it is a universal truth; therefore, it was discovered.

i've experienced that sometimes. In space, ship will refuse to point directly at vector and comes to steady state like 15 degrees off. If i manually move it to center, it will get flung off center to the other side...

Not Volume, but Mass On that note, that seems like an oversite? Shouldnt there be SOME waste? 50%?