Ippo

I don't see the problem though: here you can find all the versions we have, it's pretty complete including the latest release. Are you sure you updated the index on your end? Did you add any other repo, by chance?

What mod is that?

Hey everyone, if you are feeling adventurous, here is a pre-release that adds support for metapackages. A metapackage is simply a normal .ckan file that has no download location and has the flag "kind": "metapackage" All the rest of the format is untouched, so you can still use depends, recommends and suggests in a metapackage. This allows the creation of the long-requested mod packs, that have nothing to install but only depend on other packages. tl;dr: pre-release with mod packs.

Hi, I'm in really in a rush right now: why don't you get started, and I'll merge your PR as soon as I can

"Please save me from the brokeness". I really needed that money. It crashed :'(

Not a stupid idea at all! Actually we'd really like to have that feature (it's also very easy to implement) but we are all swamped at the moment... Of course, we welcome anyone willing to contribute! It's not that hard, if I figured it out anyone can...

Wrong. We already know that in the new aero model drag depends on the shape of the vessel and lift is proportional to v^2. We already know for sure (physics dixit) that with this kind of model getting to orbit is easier: there's no arguing that. In the past, it has been suggested that nerfing all the engines would be a way to balance a proper aero model to retain the same difficulty to orbit. And in the squadcast, they mentioned a general engine nerf: this leads me to fear that they intend to go with this plan, which I consider terrible game design and it's especially sinful in a game that dues all its success to physics. In the past I've seen Squad taking a series of decisions that I don't agree with, at all (especially in 0.90, that has completely killed my interest in career mode). I'm not doubting them for the sake of it: I doubt their ability to deliver a game that I will like because I've seen them deliberately making it less fun for me for the last 6 months. If someone likes where KSP is going, great for them! But I don't like the direction they are taking, and no amount of banhammer threats from Vanamonde will improve my own personal opinion of where Squad is taking KSP.

...and if you nerf the engines to keep the dV to LKO, you also make everything else more difficult, therefore not keeping the balance at all. if you have less efficient engines, your mum landing becomes harder regardless of the aero model. - - - Updated - - - Oh god my phone autocorrected mun with mum O.O

It's an artificial difficulty in the sense that it's caused by improper physics. There's 1 extra km/s of dV to orbit because of the current aero model: with proper physics, the dV to orbit for Kerbin is ~3500 m/s, period. It's not a value that should be "decided", as it's dictated by physics. So far, by questionable physics. Now, we are going to balance everything else in order to keep this value, which wasn't the right one in the first place. And now everyone please feel free to start with the totally obvious stream of "ksp is not a simulator", "far is not a perfect model", and similar gibberish I won't care to respond since it's been hashed to death already.

So, if I understand correctly, they are going to nerf everything so that we can keep the artificial difficulty to orbit caused by the current "aerodynamic" model? That strikes me as really weird (and also, totally expected...).

I even know some female modders, for that matter.

14€ / ~370h = 3.78 c€. I need to play some more

Hey Abdu, I don't think they can work together because of how I implemented the plug. Then again, it might have changed since my pr, not sure.

Hey, awesome! Sorry for being so pedantic, but that's not my nickname

Careful 5thHorseman, when you reach"check your privilege" you are usually within 10 posts of Godwin 's law...

Well, duh, since stock aero doesn't model stalling...

It's more physics, than your point. From your post, we gathered that you thought it was impossible to launch a rocket using an unstable rocket - we just set out to contradict this statement. Actually no, they make the rocket horrifically unstable during ascent: so much, in fact, that I had to resort to using an horrifically inefficient ascent profile so that I'd get out of the atmosphere sooner. Once I reached 100 m/s it started feeling like a rodeo, I had to keep trying to correct the rocket (and, as I said, it took me some tries before I managed to make it to orbit). The fins on the nose keep the rocket from rolling but they also try to flip it on the pitch axis, and trust me, they are strong. Try it yourself, you'll see what I mean. Eh, FAR won't be stock because the guys at squad have proved multiple times they actively discourage realism in the game.

Another reason it won't work is that Ippo is a bad, bad code-monkey and has hard-coded the name of SpareParts in a couple of places :/

Can you please point to the fins in my original design? Top to bottom, it only has 5 parts: RTG probe core fuel tank another fuel tank engine So... where did I use fins? Also the second attempt did have fins... on the freaking NOSE. Take a look at the CoL in my second attempt and tell me I cheated.

You are disqualified for using non-stock parts. Also, I need to know your mod setup, it looks awesome Is that Astronomer's?

With that question you are actually trying to prove that my rocket was stable. And yes, it was: the CoL is just a tiny bit behind the CoM. I could argue that I technically still won (you didn't say it needed to be unstable, just that it mustn't have any tail fins...), but here's a complete rebuttal just to be sure: (Before you ask: I also tried with 4 wings, but that's just too much. For my endurance, at least) It's totally unrealistic: this doesn't make Dang It a realism mod. It's just not modeling the failures correctly: it might be fun gameplay for some, but it's definitely not realistic. Engines, in particular, are plain wrong: they should have a chance of exploding when you ignite them. I know a thing or two about this, since, you know, I made it.

Not really: we just add a new RESOURCE node to the Part that is the EVA Kerbal. Which is also the only way to do it, as far as I know... as I said, we both took a look at each other's code, and found nothing suspicious. *shrugs*

Nonsense. I strongly object the statement that Dang It! is a realism mod. In the future, I suggest you try your own challenges before you triple dare people. 6 5 parts, 100% stock. Designed and built in ~30 seconds.

It's not that we are not trying to fix it, it's that we have no idea whatsoever what could be even causing it. Neither of us is doing anything weird with the resources: we both checked each other's code and everything looks totally normal to us. We are both using the stock resource mechanisms, so there's no reason on earth why they shouldn't work together... yet they don't.

We exchanged some PMs and we diagnosed the problem to be: Sorry guys, we have no idea what's up with that. It's really, really weird.