cantab

So yeah, I'm considering it as a sort of insane hard mode system. I tried an enlarged Earth myself, a few pics posted in the http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/29533-What-did-you-do-in-KSP-today/page1234 thread. I don't have a particular preference for an Earth-based or Kerbin-based version, though my thinking is Earth-based would be preferable for terrain detail. I feel my config is too glitchy for release atm. Once I get something that doesn't half bury the launchpad or give you 4 km/s before you even take off I may start a new thread releasing the config. Also got an idea or two for the other planets.

Seems like an erroneous upload. Some new features, some things absent, some things buggy. It's not the real final .90 that's for sure. Incidentally, one .90 feature that's not been talked about much but I spotted it on the streams. Info screens in various places that tell the player what they do there. Experts will probably just skip over them, but for new players that should be a big help.

Made a first, very glitchy crack at Earth 10, that is Earth but ten times larger. My rocket. Its sad little suborbital trajectory. And that was with a whopping 4 km/s boost from the Earth's rotation, since I didn't touch the day length. What it would take. Around a 25 km/s orbital speed.

Hmmm...hard to say. I've built insane huge stuff, I've also built some quite lightweight and elegant stuff. But if there's one thing in common, I'd say functional. I tend to show all parts - I don't like hiding stuff away (like batteries) too much. I will add nosecones, and in FAR fairings, but I won't go out of my way to make stuff look all neat and streamlined.

Not a lighthouse, sorry.

Quick filler one: Shining forth come night or day, Look out for me or the price you'll pay.

I can see courage and stupidity working well with the pilot system. A braver kerbal would turn the ship harder and quicker, while a timid Kerbal will be very cautious and slow. A cleverer kerbal would be better at stopping dead on, while a stupid kerbal would tend to overshoot. For scientists a simple cleverer=more science arrangement could hold. Not sure about bravery. For engineers, perhaps a cowardly kerbal would be unwilling to do repairs in certain situations. For example he won't be repacking the chutes while you're entering the atmosphere, or will insist the jet engine be shut down before he'll fix the plane's wheels. A message saying exactly what the kerbal is unhappy with would be needed.

Granted. But not for very long. "Security" I think they called your department. I wish I could go to the loo more quickly.

It's just as likely to be that few Asians are interested in playing an English-language game and discussing it on an English-language forum.

1, probes are excellent. 2, the cargo bays can easily hold a Kerballed craft.

These for me as well. They're about the only two consistent groups. Sometimes 2 does the antennae as well, because I like them out when I'm in space.

Continued to be tortured by this. I've added more struts, bringing it to 4 or 5 per drop tank, but they still just seem so weak. 1/3rd throttle they barely hold, and even then some struts break. 2/3rds and all the struts fail.I think I'm just going to have to try and do my burn being considerably underpowered. Which won't be great considering it gets .5 TWR at full throttle. And I have a headache which may be from spending the day staring at 6 fps.

For clarity, is that a maximum of 5,000 units of fuel and 5,000 of oxidizer, or a maximum of 5,000 units of fuel and oxidizer combined?

You...for God's sake, was it that easy?Yes, it's a telescope. Your turn. Expy: Lines 1-2: It catches light from the sky Line 3: Refractors and reflectors Line 4: Rifle scopes Line 5: Binoculars Line 6: Sailor's/pirate's telescopes Line 7: Space telescopes Line 8: Radio telescopes Line 9: Either used with an eyepiece or with a camera chip Line 10: Filler

Not an umbrella, or a cat or dog.

Four KAS struts weren't enough to keep the drop tanks on my Tylo ship under control, nowhere near. The two heavier tanks (with the return ships attached) broke their struts under 1/3 throttle. This thing is just tiring me out now. I don't like quitting but doing anything with it is just time-consuming and painful.

I expect you'll start seeing slowdown somewhere between 100 and 400 parts. Vague I know. By 1000 parts things will really get bad.

Darn, it's been a while since I did this. Feeling very out of practice, but here goes. Raining down, down from the sky, I catch the rain, yet I stay dry. It maybe shall go through or bounce, An enemy, I might help trounce. Perhaps you'll buy one, get one free, Perhaps you'll just be all at sea. At times I might well fly and soar, At times to listen is what I'm for. All for a man, or a machine, What am I? This you must glean.

Well, I've done neither.But I expect the Jool-5 will be harder, mainly because it's just a lot more. You've got an atmo landing (which might be a spaceplane or a jet rocket if you choose), various vacuum landings including the game's toughest, numerous transfers around the Joolian system which is basically the same as a whole bunch of interplanetary transfers. An Eve ascent is difficult but it's just one difficult thing. Well, two if you count landing on target on high ground.

It's more efficient, by a substantial margin, to do your entire ejection burn from low Kerbin orbit. Setting up a manouvre to just escape Kerbin's SOI then another in solar orbit to get to the target planet can be a useful technique to find launch windows, but don't burn those manouvres, just timewarp to the second one then do a single burn from LKO. Mun assists are generally not very useful for interplanetary travel, you're looking at a 10% delta-V saving at best. The Mun just isn't big enough. It can be useful for changing inclination of your orbit round Kerbin though, if for some reason you couldn't launch into the right inclination to begin with. Planet-planet assists on the other hand are much more useful. Eve and Kerbin are both very massive bodies and with correct flying you just about anywhere by ping-ponging off them. Jool is even bigger and can fling your ship around like crazy. Duna is a bit weak but can be useful, I made two Duna assists to match planes with Dres for example. Moho is generally only useful to help you get to Moho (you can reduce your capture burn by making some flybys first), and Dres and Eeloo are too small to be much help.

It falls into the category of confirming what we believed, but it's a good result nonetheless.

The energy looks about right. Around 10% of light speed the Newtonian equation is still reasonably accurate. As for what would happen, well xkcd discusses hypervelocity impacts, https://what-if.xkcd.com/20/ He doesn't specifically address 0.1c though, jumping from 0.01c to 0.99c.

KSP is in the uncommon position that what you as the player do strongly affects performance. The more parts you put on a given ship - and even which parts they are - the more it loads the CPU. For every CPU there comes a point where it can't keep up and the game slows down, and for every current CPU that point is within the range of what you might reasonably do. Anyway, as a laptop that's not bad, though it's emphatically not a gaming laptop. It'll play stuff, but in graphically-demanding games you'll have to drop the detail down a lot. As a computer, a decent desktop will run rings round it.

Not bad. Certainly a darn sight better than anything I could do.

If you want people to join your project for free, you'd better have more than just a nice idea. Nice ideas are ten a penny. You need more. Once you can bring one aspect, and a real technical aspect like code or graphics, then you may be able to attract others. If you're going to employ developers, then do what you like. It's your money. Don't be surprised if you waste it though.