smart013

Sorry if i missed a thread, but i wondered why there isnt already a new discussion about the next mod thats going to be integrated into stock ksp: Batsmaps comment on twitter If i understand correctly it will be revealed today. I know some will (again) hope its Fine Print (i dont), but i would set my money on something like Transfer Window Planner, maybe in the style of the mechjeb integration (without promoting to include mechjeb of course). Pretty sure its not FAR, NEAR, DR etc, either. Another partspack for people with memory to spare?

Ok, here my latest moderate success with the updated ATM. KSP32bit, Win7 64bit, AMD Athlon II X4 640, 3GHz, GeForce GTX 560, 4GB Memory, windowmode, open-gl. The following updated 61 (whoa) mods: Some inconclusive experimentation in the settings (with and without astronomers settings.cfg). Memory Footprint after starting up around 2.5 - 3GB. Everything seems to work (ok, Interstellar still has the treeloader problem, but thats not the point here) with my old .24.2 Save. Every vessel is where it belongs, didnt see anything weird with the textures. No crashes so far (but not much marathon played either). But the main problem is that the framerate is really low, especially compared to exactly the same mod compilation in 24.2 that was really fast. For KSP anyway. As an example the camera motion in the main menue is really sluggish. Definitely progress, but not really playable for be either. Dont know if part of the problem is ATM, for the moment it seems to work insofar that KSP started and runs again. Thanks for that

I am sure once ATM is fixed the combination 32bit + ATM (+ optional opengl) will cover the most installs with lots of mods and the same performace as 64bit. Imho right now its the best what we have till squad makes progress with 64bit and the modders can return to 64bit without the risk to get insane over all the "ma ksp dunn work!" feedback day after day.

Since nearly everything in and around space exploration (and their counterparts ingame) were at one time of the last 70 years science fiction i am fine with as much ideas and inventions can imagine for the next 100 years or so. Including some potential (if maybe overly optimistic) breakthroughs like the alcubierre drive or other spacetime "warping" innovations. Of course one could put forward a extremly conservative if not pessimistic view of coming space travel but in my book games dont fit very good witch words like conservative or pessimistic. And in my view since i first saw it kerbal space program is first and above all a game. It will never be a simulation, imho hoping for the day when suddenly the curtain drops and a super realistic, orbiterlike ksp pro hardcore extreme realism comes into the light is a great recipe for false hopes, misdirected energy and frustration. A bit more "realism" will find its way, but never on the scale of FAR or RSS. As a matter of fact ksp will have achieved everything one could realistically hope for if it sees 2017 without beeing significantly dumbed down for one goal or another. So... Why should i have a problem with technologies, near or far (no pun intended) that get only integrated via mods anyway? What incentive could i possible have to tell everyone how proud to be stock i am, why everything that nasa at least experiments with (and dreams of) that exceeds Wernher von Brauns ideas is devils work? Feeling superior to other gamers that have fun with things like greenhouses, drilling karbonite or energytransfer through space? So yes, i enjoy potential technological advances that look like science fiction in the same way as todays space travel would look like for oberth and braun in the 1920s. Put these things into mods, place it right in a enhanced techtree, make it a challenge to get there and all is good for me. What? Thats exactly the situation now? Great By the way - these kind of threads have become something of a initiation ritual for forum newcomers like the first mechjeb rant. I wonder why...

The initiative (or the discussion about it) was pushed aside by the hypetrain of course, but can be found here: Initiative: Let's help squad improve the stability of x64 in 0.25+ The was quite some activity of devs here, for example Harvester: Harvesterposting We`ll see what the future holds

Thanx for all the work. Funny how every update one, mostly very very important Mod breaks... this time ATM gets the "couldnt imagine how i would miss it" price

Hi, still using this mod with .24.2 since not all of my mods are updated yet. Right now i have i problem of understanding. I have three beacons active at the moment, one around kerbin (1800km), one around duna and one around minmus. The minmus one is an early testbeacon (smallest beacon), and both beacons around duna and kerbin are LB-15 "Meander". I had successful transfers from Kerbin to Duna and back before, and Karborundum is plentyful in both. Transfercosts were mostly around 150-200 Karborundum per trip. But a new try with a light vehicle (30t) showed the needed amount roundabout 30000 Units Karborundum from Kerbin to Duna... Does this mean that Duna ist just too far away at the moment?

Thats great! How often you get answers about a planet you are looking at directly from the creator? Never happens to me when i look at Jupiter, thats for sure

What work for player A doesnt works for player B. And no conclusive ideas why that is so to see on the horizon. Hence the tagging as "unstable". And for the time beeing no amount of "but for me everything is fine" will change this until mayor updates are here. Maybe some people should change their perception from "64bit is cool, 32bit is lame" to "64bit isnt working for the majority of players, but 32bit does". To get 64bit working has nothing to do with skill, its more about luck at this point in time. If you really want to help and not only to brag then supply the community with in depth information about your testing enviroment. What i understand from postings on reddit is that Squad is planning a heavily moderated thread where the community and the devs are going to try to really get rid of the bees in 64bit. This could be the right way to do it.

Since SpacePlane Plus was already in the list of "essential" mods (at least in most of the compilations i saw that used ATM) ... sorry, i doubt that S+ is the reason.

Here's a cute wolf to even further tide everyone over until your next update. Eating a cat. (sorry, i am more of a dogperson )

Same here. Playing latest version with FAR. Chutes that i tried to open around 200-300m/s are instant red (no information in the logs), below 200 it mostly works. Till now i thought that is working as intended (too fast at the moment of opening). Not sure if i am right

God, i hate the opera...

2-3 people are not "the masses". Just saying. And according to tonality, drama and style this thread should be moved to the rocket builders subforums.

Funny. Now apparently we have something like "bug fanboys" too. Ok, its only my opinion, i may be wrong, but imho its a bug, not a feature. Simple as that. It will be fixed one way or the other. Its not necessary to "defend" it, or incorporate it in some weird form of "hardcore reality" gameplay. To get your plane "dropped" on the runway at start is crazy in the first place, there are wheels on these planes and runways to drive to the starting position for a reason "Hey Jeb, our 5 Billion STTO prototype is ready, standing by in the SPH!". "Great Bill, just fly it to the runway and drop it from at least 3m, no time to drive it there!!"

Thanks again for your response! Of course the heatshield version was and is again the way to go, not the least because it "feels right". Whatever happens, i am sure a sensible stock solution will manifest itself so adapting to it for fun and profit is possible.

Thanks for your work and clarification. Look, the problem in my case is not to adapt. Of course its possible to adjust ascents / reentries to the "new" rules if necessary. But for me using DR is not a thing to use and say "look mum, i did it!", but ideally a (new) fact of life around which my whole space programs adapts and changes if needed. If from one day to the next the rules change drastically enough that a whole redesing of a lot of vessels is needed i only want to be sure that these changes make sense in my enviroment and will last. For example some of my launchers had a good track record for reentry in FAR with the engines retrograde taking the most heat and surviving, shielding chutes at the top of the rocket in the process. Nice and simple. Before that and without FAR most of my launchers had inflateble shields at the top making reentry prograde (headon). Less simple but challengeing. All this with the goal of full recovery in career mode in mind. Since i want to save funds i rarely have the case of only returning with a small capsule, more often complete rocket stages from lko. If now i have to redesign everything according to the new rules i only want to make sure that these rules are sensible enough in my enviroment to stand. Not exactly the intention to make everything easypeasy i would think However, thanks again. Will for now make the changes by hand and see how everything comes together.

When using this with FAR + DR i sometimes find that elements such as the mj case, or some parts from roverdudes packs seem not to be properly shielded while behind the fairings (even get the shielded=false notice from DR). That could mean that sometimes such parts get destroyed. Is this solely a problem in my install?

Sorry, but now i am confused. What should i do if i want DR + FAR without RSS (!) and a going back to more (imho) reasonable reentry chances as before? Download the version 5.3.2? Edit by hand? Wait for update? Please i know some people defend every change as long if it makes things MOAR HARDCORE, but i dont want to play with RSS settings in a stock + FAR environent, while i dont mind a reasonable challenge.

Banned on behest of General Assumptions (of authority).

Far (sic!) from beeing an expert, but i switched to FAR quite recently and i like do lay a lot of routine into mj hands. That meant i had to "master" ascents again from scratch before i could begin to use mj again. The changes that followed were: - simpler, but more powerful rockets. Topheavy (com in front) with small fins, vernier engines for correction, procedural fairings. After some testing the paylot got way up, and it got easier to orbit (inkl. Reentry and pinpoint recovering with DR). As a matter of fact its now easier and cheaper for me than without FAR. - in mj my new friend is the field for angle of attack, the more my rocket is not well balanced the less percentage. Since some trial and errors my rockets got good enough that i dont need this most of the time. - no force roll. At least for me for the moment. - ascent path by hand... Mostly starting the gravity turn around 1000m (or as soon as possible), and in a smooth curve up to 69km (for an 75km orbit) Granted, i mostly build rather big rockets for payloads from 20 up to 300 tons payload with KW Rocketry. And since i can assure in 9 from 10 launches the return of the complete mainstage (minus boosters if needed) to ksp for a nice 97% cash return i tend to build not cheap. Lots of chutes of course, an some intense planning and construction to survive reentry and hit the waters near ksp. But now its possible again to let mj do the job without fearing too much Edit: concerning "optimally"... my goal in career is - with or without the help of mj with ascent and/or landing - to get the payload into low kerbin orbit, deorbit the mainstage, survive the reentry and hit the waters near ksp for high cash return. As long as there is some sparefuel at the end for a short burn before impact into the water the fuel consumption is irrelevant for me. Of course you can achieve all sorts of optimum by chosing burn times, angle of attack, ascent profiles and so on. The rocket may cost 300000 funds, but since the return is 97% ... who cares?

Since i want to continue transforming karbonite into karbonium (?) i still stand a bit aside from k+. Maybe after 2.5 (and some editing). And your logic is of course sound, but since sand from the sahara on earth travels all the way over the atlantic (and in parts into the upper athmosphere) i would say mine has its merits too. Gotcha Anyway, thanks for the great work and to be so near to your communitybase!

Latest version, particle collector with enough energy in 52km orbit around duna. About "why duna?".. ok, lets see. Since Duna isnt real its hard to make a scientific case, but Duna has a strong resemblance to Mars. On Mars (and Duna with the EVE Pack) huge sandstorms are covering large parts of the planet regularely. According to curiosity rover there are carbon based compounds found on mars, and i wouldnt see it much of a stretch to say that these are blown up into the athmosphere in smallish amounts. Very smallish maybe. Off course that could be yesterdays science tomorrow, and Duna isnt Mars 1:1. But from this (my) point of view this speaks for small amounts of karbonite to collect around duna orbit at 50-55km or so. As from the gameplay perspective... it depends how much you want to challenge (maybe frustrate) the player, in this case me again. From the planets we got, and if youre leaving the kerbin/mun system at all, duna seems to be one of the planets where a lot of gameplay happens. This is the place to be for bases, stations, supporting ressource networks and so on. And collectors imho. I had longtime bases on all capable planets, and there is imho only far away laythe as a close second for this kind of gameplay. With new biomes this will enhance a lot more of course. Eeloo as prime spot for K+ stuff..? Ok, makes sense. No karbonite out of the upper atmosphere, low orbit of duna? Seems a artificial decision to me. Right now for example i play career ksp with far, dr, esld jump beacons, kspi, tac ls and without excessive timewarping plus alarm clock. My choice, each to his own playstyle. But i dont really see the need to remove ressources in places where they are to be expected just for some unnecessary hardship. Its hard enough. Hell, even with small amounts of "realism" (not my agenda at all) water should be reaaaally rare, not some carbonbased stuff. Ok, these are my arguments for the case. I think it makes sense and is open for debate if you like Since i cannot expect to see you include "duna orbital karbonite" in vanilla karbonite just because of me, again some details how to include this in configs by myself would be highly appreciated. My experiments up until now were fruitless

Whatever you do, do not change your sig. "Ich bin lernen Deutsch." may be wrong (it is), but its german enough and very funny. And we cannot have too many funny things in and around german. ("Ich lerne deutsch." would be correct but ... booring) Edit: And Mark Twain in 1880 was of course right concerning the nature of my language. Germans dont have a large legacy of getting really drunk for nothing. One of the first things many germans get rid of when getting drunk is "Hochdeutsch" (the "high" form of german in most germanspeaking countries). They change into their regional dialect of german pretty fast and *this* is the really nice way to talk german. Its also where the fun comes into play, since "Hochdeutsch" is not the best language of all to tell a dirty joke.

Since youre reducing fractals "good bits" on shiny effects and nice new engines count me out of this "we're all hoping". This is your bias / agenda, not mine. The real KSPI and fractals philosohies are much more than that, and in my opinion still superior in most parts to lite. Your mileage may differ of course. But if i understood Wave right in his last postings afters fractals comeback both forks will be reunited in coming version numbers anyway. My guess is that his handling of ressource integration with the mod community will find its way in future KSPI versions, maybe some tweakscale support, but the bulk of changes with emphasis on gameplay over physics will go and find itself a new / old haven in waves private fork of KSPI as before. And imho thats great