cantab

As is often the case, adding verses only makes it even more perplexing. Wind?

My *minimum* is 70 km. My target might be higher, but that's the bare minimum periapsis I consider stable.

I tend to be rather po-faced with mine. But a while back I did have a Brown Smear series of rockets. And you could say that naming a rocket the Macbeth was tempting fate. Quite a lot of Kerbals died on its first mission too.

7/10. Not bad, but I'm not too keen on the diamond wing shape.

I'm evidently interpreting it as a frequency, which both electricity and sound have. That's not a new hint EDIT: Anyway, I'm guessing tinnitus. Though I don't see how it fits much beyond being "noise without source".

Electricity? Or bagpipe music?

Episode 5 was spent doing the old rolling pin rover to scrounge up some science, enough to unlock the coveted 90-point Aerodynamics node. The one with the KAX electric propeller, which can get me places without needing fuel

4/10. I really can't see much. But I question why something called "search and rescue" is shooting something else.

Speed? Age?

Before Episode 4 I did a new install and caught up, doing a few missions that culminated in a kethane scanner put into orbit. I begun Episode 4 with a splendid blunder. I looked at contracts and saw "Test Basic Jet" and "Test Small Gear Bay", and I thought to myself hey! I can make a jet car and go for a drive! Intakes! So with those contracts taken and of little use, I decided I had better build a Mun rocket to get some science. I designed an unmanned ship, the Red Spark 1 named after viewer R3dtango, that had the delta-V for a landing and would take almost all my remaining kethane to refuel it. Having used the Stayputnik for lightness, it was then that I was introduced to the joys of flying with FAR and without SAS. Dang that was tricky! The Red Spark 1 has yet to even reach space, never mind the Mun, due to the extreme difficulty in controlling it. Besides trying to stick with the same approach, I now see various possible options: * Get a joypad/joystick and try flying with that rather than the keyboard. * Build an unmanned rocket using the MRS Guidance Nosecone, which has SAS - but masses 400 kilograms. * Build a manned rocket. I could put a Kerbal on the Mun, and with Crew Reports and maybe EVAs and surface samples I would get good science. But I doubt I could bring him back, and thanks to TACLS that means he'll perish. Then again, if I start needing to use the Kerbal unreconstitutionator lots of Kerbals will perish. * Put the Mun stuff on hold and go for a science scrounge around Kerbin again. A bit boring maybe, but it's the sensible option.

Dream PC spec right there. If I had to pick a nit, I'd say there's not enough SSD space. And the glowing case isn't my thing, but that's purely practical - I sleep in the same room as my computer and sometimes leave it on overnight. I went to the extent of disconnecting the power and HDD lights on my current because they were too bright.

I run the Linux 64-bit version of KSP with a fair few mods and have crashes very rarely. I've maybe had one or two in 0.90. But I've seen and heard many other players , who I assume are running a Windows version of KSP, having crashes like you describe and/or considering it normal to need to restart the game periodically. It does seem like 0.90 on Windows has a memory leak bug. EDIT: And now you say you use a Macbook Pro. What Operating System are you playing KSP on, and is it practical to try a different OS? As Alshain says, if you are playing stock you shouldn't need ATM unless you're trying to play KSP on a computer with 2 GB of memory.

I think it's confusing, because a parabolic orbit more normally refers to one that escapes - but only just. Like a circular orbit, it's an ideal that's never possible in real life - real orbits are either elliptical or hyperbolic. Most non-periodic comets, for example, are on near-parabolic orbits. I think the order to explain things will depend on your focus. If you're talking about satellites in Earth orbit, I'd start by considering an ideal circular orbit, then move on to "what if it's at this height but it's going a bit faster" and discuss real elliptical orbits. If on the other hand you start by considering the planets and moons, you probably want to start by talking about how the orbits are ellipses - almost circular ellipses, but ellipses nonetheless.

Eh, it's just a guess really. And the way the riddles are, you never know if something's literal or poetic. Vexx's "tune of an ancient song" had nothing at all to do with music, and to "die" could well be a metaphor for something unrelated to actual death of living things.

Is it a sand dune? They're supposed to make weird singing noises and stuff.

Except for one rather large problem. The PS4, XBox One, and Wii U all use AMD graphics. That's 35 million gaming machines that won't appear in the Steam survey. Any developer targeting consoles as well as (or instead of!) PC needs to make their game work well with AMD graphics.

My understanding is that when Squad started working on KSP, Unity was the only affordable choice. Tim Sweeney, founder of Unreal Engine's developer Epic Games, said himself in 2014. Source: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/213517/Epic_radically_changes_licensing_model_for_Unreal_Engine.php When he was talking about this and when UE4 was released on said new business model, Kerbal Space Program had been out for over two years.

Well, you kind of can, with the new superSAS. When it works you just set to follow a direction and let it go. Keep half an eye on the situation while you do something else. Only snag is the superSAS struggles with ships that either have too much or too little control authority. Also factor in that ions shine for small probes which also take 4x physics warp well, and they're actually decent as they are. The main problem IMHO is lack of big xenon tanks, they'd be more feasible for small-medium kerballed missions if we had bigger xenon tanks.

Timewarp will "lock" your orbit in place, allowing you to more easily set up manoeuvre nodes. But the jitter will return when you leave timewarp. The problem can be reduced by making smaller and stiffer spacecraft.

As you've presented it, this is a development suggestion rather than a support topic. Personally I'd like to see it resolved in 1.0 but I don't see it as a showstopper issue. Many programs, games and otherwise, have problems at very high screen resolutions and lowering the system resolution is an obvious workaround for all of them.

Keep in mind that you're using old versions, and the VAB/SPH got big changes in 0.90. There's every chance the bugs have changed. 0.90 also adds several new and powerful tools, in my view you're really handicapping yourself trying to do a complex build in an older version.

Water? 10chars

Hard to say. I mean you need to be both in KSP. I probably spend more time on VAB work than flying, but I think that's just the nature of the game. Ultimately though I think the extent to which I've used gravity assists tips me into the pilot camp. I've been known to spend a full week of play working on a single gravity assist that I want to be just right.

On-rails objects still do require the game to do a bit. In normal circumstances it's no big deal, but if you go and make several hundred bits of debris it can become noticeable. For KSP players, almost always launching to the same inclination does drastically increase the chance of close encounters compared to real life. But then it also reduces the closing speed of any such encounters. The big factor against collisions I think is that objects can't collide "off screen", or in timewarp. So collisions could happen, but they'd do nothing, the two objects would pass through each other unseen and untouched.

I think the jet engines will get changed in 1.0. At the moment they need good TWR to push planes through the soup, but that means they can also lift rockets extremely effectively. When the new aero gives less drag the jets can have less TWR and still perform as well in planes, but they won't do the slightly silly jet-rocket thing so well.