cantab

Down to -70

Some people have instead been pointing the finger at the resources code - the part that handles fuel consumption, electricity generation, and so on. That should be testable by comparing different ships with the same overall part count but varying numbers of tanks, engines, and structural parts. Oh, absolutely. From 0.90 to 1.0 was a huge, huge, step backwards in performance. Unfortunately basically every modder moved their efforts to 1.0.x before this really became widely known. So we're faced with a choice between bad performance or being stuck with old mods. It only affected a couple of versions of the mod and got fixed. But I'll give you a hint: it's not called Kalileo

who knows? -67 (-)

Down to -65

-63 (-)

-63 (-)

-61 (-)

-59 (-).

-57 (-). Insert witty quote.

"Easiest" is a single launch station, think Skylab rather than ISS. Cheapest would I expect be something all reusable. KSP streamer Matoroignika has a couple of Falcon 9 style rockets and he's got it down to a fine art, landing the first stage under power back at KSC, no need for FMRS or Stage Recovery, but he's yet to make a reusable upper stage for them.

^ That Squad should fix that. It's up there with the most idiotic of KSP's bugs. But they haven't even mentioned it.

Rain old man? This is hardly a drizzle. -51 (-)

Back to the original question KSP is unoptimized, that's what there's been a digression on. Mods absolutely can hurt performance. I've seen as much as an 80 - yes, eight zero - percent fps drop from a buggy mod. Your system is virtually identical to mine - I have a Phenom II X3 overclocked to 3.1 GHz, a GTX 750 Ti, 4 GB of RAM, and run Xubuntu 14.04. This means we can make a comparison. On a bone stock install, but with my normal game settings, I've been able to get the start of lag at around 100 parts. But that's just the real edge of it - the MET clock flickers yellow, with the game running at 0.9-1.0x normal speed and maintaining close to 25 fps. And it does depend on the parts, some affect performance worse than others. (For example, I flew the big stock plane and with the cargo bays open it was measurably worse than with them closed.) If you're noticing that kind of slight framerate drop and finding it objectionable then KSP might not be the game for you. If you're getting what I'd call serious issues, let's say below 15-20 fps, the MET clock solidly yellow or even red, something that a total non-gamer would notice, then I'd look at whether one of your mods is responsible.

Down to -51

Yeah, a dock or maybe a slipway would be welcome. Rolling boats all the way down the runway and into the water gets tedious.

-48 (-)

Down to -46

-37 (-)

Down to -38

-37 down

-35.0000

Argh! It's just a little too small to read! -33 (-)

-33 (-) Go go go!

-33 (-) Support happened.

-32 (-)