BudgetHedgehog

Ooooh, purdy... subscribed!

Just me saying that I have experienced that as well, at least in the previous v3 release. Will test to confirm in a bit. EDIT:

I play pretty much exclusively Career and disliked this idea from the get-go. I just didn't want Squad to spend time developing something that amounts to +5 Shirt of Isp or +3 Boots of Thrust. It's just turning kerbals into totems that improve the engines performance (apparently through magic). I actually want kerbal XP, but as long as it increases at least funds/science/rep - the driving forces behind Career mode. And it wasn't a flame war against anything - in fact, one of the most civilised arguments I've seen here. And it wasn't against kerbal XP, it was about the specific incarnation of it (again, people suggested better uses for it in this thread, like science boost, or repair things better somehow). So yeah - I play career and I don't want to be magically granted more thrust because I have a specific pilot on board. Let me just remove him and oops, my rocket can't even take off any more. How does that make any sense at all... a rocket has a specific mass and a specific thrust - simply having Ludberry Kerman instead of Ferfel Kerman in the pilots seat does not change that.

I don't know how good Steams Verify Cache function is - you're probably better off deleting the Squad folder and then verifying. And if you have no other mods that add or change stuff to that Squad folder (like KW Rocketry and the launch clamp sounds), you'll be fine.

Mainly to reduce clutter in your part list (I did the same for when I had TACLS installed). By having one part in the list that you can then change the size of once it's placed means less functionally-identical-but-just-different-sized parts to scroll past before you get the one you want. You can delete Tweakscale, of course, but then you're stuck with the one size for all the parts. Or you can delete the other configs for Tweakscale and just keep the ones for IR.

Yes. 10 chars.

"We're heading toward the ground at 300 mph in a lander can that's barely thicker than foil, we're all doomed...! Oh wait, no we're not, Jeb's here! Nothing to worry about!"

Press Alt+F11 and use that reload instead.

Completely normal and intended for ascent guidance to not ascend.* (my guess is that your controlling part is upside down, though). *not actually normal or intended.

Hell, I'd be happy with something just like Final Frontier. I like to know where my little guys have been and what they've done.

Ok, so Bill engages SAS (which isn't controlled by a kerbal and is literally powered by the laws of physics) and now the ship stays pointing at the same place while Bill takes his hands off the (curiously absent) flight stick.

It's working pretty much exactly the same as it did in 0.24.

My biggest problem with 'it's the kerbals that are doing what you tell them, they're ultimately in control of the ship' is that they're demonstrably not. Go in IVA and increase throttle. Does the kerbals hand move the stick? No. There aren't even any kind of flight controls for them to use. You can tell them to do a barrel roll and the ship will barrel roll, but they won't move. Or are we saying that they have telekinesis now? That they can move the ship without touching it? Then why bother with engines and fuel, just lift whatever you want into orbit. Kerbals do not control the ship. The player does. Any attempt to justify the opinion that kerbals are in control raises more questions than it answers. "yeah, they're moving the throttle stick, the devs just haven't animated it yet" - I'm sorry, but my suspension of disbelief will only go so far. Having to believe that the kerbals are flying the ship while watching them not fly the ship is absurd.

No crash logs maybe, but there will be an output_log.txt file created which you should post.

One thing that I think hasn't been addressed much is probe control. Will it be equivalent to the very best pilot and his +5 Shirt of Isp? If so, then what's to stop me putting a probe on every ship I fly and basically just having the kerbals as passengers in a cockpit? If probe control is equivalent to a non-experienced kerbal, then.. why? It's literally a computer executing commands or it's literally me piloting the ship and I'm a damn good pilot who can stay pointing at the node. Incidentally, I think the whole 'better experienced kerbals can point at the manoeuvre node better' is ridiculous. That's what the SAS is for, to keep you pointing in a certain direction. If you told your total newb of a kerbal to point in this certain direction and press the SAS button, the result would be the same as if you told the most experienced pilot to do the same. Unless the torque wheels are somehow affected by who presses the button, which would be magic and stupid.

Luckily, my link is still active:

My thoughts in a nutshell, thank you.

But why make something like this and then have to tune it down to not be "game-breaking"? Why not make it an obvious boost/nerf to rep/science gain etc? Or anything similar to the strategies - make it so certain kerbals increase contract gains or decrease launch costs or something? If the tweaks are as subtle as Mu suggests then wow, my engine got upgraded from 310 vac Isp to 315. Excuse me while I go set up balloons and marching band to celebrate this "subtle but not too easy" increase.

Well, basically anything that doesn't affect hardware performance would be better. Funds/rep/science gain or penalty or patch conic mod change or more things able to be done on EVA or anything that doesnt change how the vessel I built flies. I wonder how mods like KER or MJ would handle this - would they take into account the absolute optimum thrust or the default crews thrust (I hate that I had to write that) or what? Seriously bad idea, Squad. After 10 months of playing this game and supporting every change/improvement made, for the first time, I have to urge the devs to scrap this line of thinking. Make it so I get a bonus on mission completion or boosted rep gain upon vessel recovery or something.. don't make it so I can change an engines fuel flow simply by putting a certain kerbal in the cockpit. That is unrealistic/unbelievable and makes that craft mostly unusable to someone else without that exact same kerbal XP.

Oh probably, but I don't know how or even where to begin. It'd be complicated, for sure though... My advice would be to just replace the folding docking port with the Mk2 inline one. Much simpler and would probably require minimal extra dV.

"So here's my craft which will work perfectly in any save.. provided you have a kerbal of X experience so the thrust is boosted and a kerbal of experience Y which maximises the Isp". This basically is completely opposite to Squads argument against procedural universes - every player should have the same experience every time. A big part of KSP is the sharing of info, vessels and knowledge and to be able to create a vessel that only works provided you have certain XP (for want of a better word) goes against that. "Oh hey newbie, you're looking for help getting to orbit? I'm afraid I can't help you - all my kerbals are sufficiently experienced to be able to cope with a vessel that won't work with your kerbals." Not to mention that this gives no reason to use any other kerbals than the most experienced - "sorry Ferfel, you're not coming. You haven't been on enough mission to be able to make the LV-909 give 75 thrust instead of 50". Given that the game defaults to the first 3 kerbonauts upon launch, the vessel you build might be different to the vessel you launch, depending on how experienced the default 3 are (or however many fit in the pod etc). Read any topic about being able to upgrade parts via Science or procedural planets/universes and then read Mu's devnotes. This is basically a complete 180 and I really hope Squad reconsiders. Sure, boost science, rep or funds gain or whatever but please don't change the way my ship actually works. It'd basically throw away anyone who uses standardised launchers as subassemblies as well as there's no guarantee they'd work the same across missions. Please reconsider this, Squad.

It's working fine for me. No part names were changed in 0.25 and that's what this mod targets so it should (and does for me) work straight out the box. Nothing wrong or broken as far as I can tell and I'm currently enjoying this on hard mode career so.. yeah, unless there's things I haven't noticed (which I wouldn't know about), it works 100% as intended.

No TweakScale errors pop out to me, however you do get a lot of errors from the contract system - is this a save where you previously had FinePrint installed? Also, the log says it couldn't load PotatoRoid and creates an error from that.

And regarding more procedural fairings textures, have you seen blackhearts? Some nice textures there.

Your mistake was to attach a docking port to a robotic part. It's a shame sirkut removed that issue from the OP, but yeah, it screws up all kinds of parent/child attachments.. basically, don't do it.