cantab

Actual "PSA": Planet packs can impact framerate. With a few major packs all installed together I get about a 10% fps hit. (I'm keeping them, but I shan't add more just yet). It's not huge, but it's there, and other mods can impact fps too. It can easily add up even if each individual mod has only a minor effect.

I might just knock up some custom configs to give certain parts lolhuge hab values. Basically my concept is that something big enough can effectively *be* "home" for the Kerbals on board. I had a concept along the same lines for USI-LS, I don't think it's currently supported: Recognise a certain combination of parts in a single vessel as making it a second home, meaning that the Kerbals present (up to a limit) will have indefinite hab and home time. I'm imagining it would be used by the largest base and station parts, for example the stuff from Civilian Population would fit the bill, or UKS's upcoming Mk IV parts.

If you're really anti-overclocking then the 4790K can make sense. It's not cheap, but I'd expect it to boost KSP's framerate by about 15% and while that's not much it's more than anything else is likely to do.

And on page 483 people were talking about tweakscale causing problems with FAR. As I understand it the bug still exists in FAR 0.15.6.3 but Ferram said he expects it to be fixed in the next FAR release.

Known Kopernicus bug. Workaround is to load up the game and go straight into the Tracking Station and Science Archives. The archives get broken when you go into another scene, such as the VAB or the Tracking Station, and then back to the Space Centre screen. Subsatellites are possible in some situations. Though I like New Horizons laid out the way it is. I've enjoyed getting to grips with departing from LKO for an interplanetary transfer, it adds a bunch of new considerations that the stock game doesn't.

A gamepad or flightstick can be really good, if you don't have one already.

How well does USI-LS handle really long missions? Reading the documentation, it sounds like if I want to do for example a 50-year mission, I'd end up needing a (in my view) crazy amount of hab space. Or is UKS built to make such ships reasonably possible?

Granted. But you get convicted of animal cruelty. I wish a northern hemisphere star more than 5 light-years away would go supernova tonight.

Pretty nice. Rather sleeker and shinier than my battlestation.

Done my usual performance testing with the new FAR and it's not the best performance, I get about a 20% fps drop on a large rocket flying in FAR vs in stock. (Aero FX turned to minimal to eliminate the effect they have on fps.) In the past I've had mixed results, sometimes it's been similar but other times FAR has had a negligible impact on performance. Is optimisation something you're looking at in the near term, or will we just have to wait?

Yeah. Reading through, the agreement claims that whatever "Score" - program, basically - you put in, you hand over copyright to IBM. Even for an experimental facility like this, that is going too far.

I disagree, I feel Keelon stood out as a super-Eve, a real challenge to visit. The closest mod world I know is Titanus, but that has an oxygen atmosphere and a very different look. On the other hand, Killashley has a lot of planets to look after now! Considering how many mod gas giants have rings, I kind of like Sarin not having them.

Once SpaceX have the reusability down, I imagine that if they want to do a launch that requires discarding the booster (for delta-V reasons) then they'll probably do it with a refurbished one.

Granted I wish to be an all-powerful free genie.

The thing is axial tilt would be cool, but it wouldn't have much impact on anyone but experienced players, assuming Kerbin doesn't get tilted. And it's been mentioned that modifying KSP to support it would be a lot of work. I think there are much better ways Squad could put in that lot of work.

It's still quite conservative stock clocks. Obviously thermals are a challenge, but I would have thought something like 4.0 boost would be achievable.

I found Europa Universalis IV fun. It's not flashy though.

Granted. I wish that hadn't darn near crashed Firefox.

Patched version of Boris for latest KSP Literally all I did was changed \es to /es as I mentioned before. This has only had the bare minimum of testing - the planets load with KSP 1.1.2, Kopernicus 1.0.3, and appear correct in the Tracking Station. They could be buggy when you try landing on them. Feel free to reupload somewhere better for hosting KSP mods.

1.1 has a stock rocket with the same single-booster feature. It is indeed somewhat flyable, although it does want to sideslip which probably isn't aerodynamically ideal.

It's so-so. Could be better, could be worse. 40mm Plossl eyepiece: Suffers from the field of view being restricted by the 1.25" eyepiece size. 17 and 10mm Plossls: Fine. 7.5 and 6.3 mm Plossls: You might have eye relief problems with these. But if you're OK with the short eye relief then they'll give nice views. You won't know until you try. Barlow: Should be OK. Moon filter: Maybe useful, the Moon can be OMG bright in a telescope. Though expert lunar observers usually prefer not using a filter. Coloured filters: Of limited use. Some people like these filters, others don't. Regard them as a bonus and not much of the value of the set. Case: Really useful, though similar cases aren't too expensive to buy separately. So overall I'd say two good eyepieces, 3 questionable ones (I wouldn't buy them individually myself), and some extras.

I've kept saves going through planet additions, removals, and updates before. It can take some fiddly manual save editing, and there's no guarantee every craft can be preserved - in particular anything landed may go boom when you switch to it if the planet terrain has changed. But the overall save should be able to stay. PS: And so far so good for KSP 1.1.2, Kop 1.0.3, and NH 1.7. The system loads and is playable. There are a few glitches - I just ran over to Leouch on fuelhack and the atmosphere is physically present but visually invisible. And then the game crashed during the atmo descent, but I believe that that is a general crash issue on Linux independent of the mods. Sadly even if NH works fine, that crashing could well nix my KSPing.

Regarding New Horizons 2, I'll just say that the New Horizons I've known I've adored. Serran is gorgeous, Titanus splendid. Descending into the depths of Leouch was one of the most truly awe-inspiring things I'd done in KSP, and flying through the canyons of Nolas felt straight out of Star Wars. Basically, don't change too much. I think I mentioned it before, but would Uncharted Lands support be on the cards? I'm thinking UL planet overhauls in the NH system layout.

Testing on the pre-release, with a 600 part rocket KSP was using the equivalent of 1 1/2 cores on my Core i3-6100. I interpret that as meaning KSP still has one thread doing more than half the work, when flying a single ship at least, and therefore gave the advice above. When it comes to how much performance a single core gives, AMD's architecture is so far behind that an AMD FX overclocked to 5.0 GHz still does worse than a Pentium G4400 at 3.3 GHz.

The pointy one is a cool render, but I doubt it's doable with current materials. You're expecting an entire SSTO to weigh not much more than the Dragon capsule alone.