EdFred

but if we are going to have the ability to fail at contracts, maybe even to the point where contracts aren't even offered to us anymore, KSP 1.0 could very well have a failure condition. There need not be a victory condition to have a failure condition. And if one is afraid to fail, sandbox is right there. Actually most of the goof off stuff in KSP, I do in sandbox.

Sort of my point. If players suck badly enough (either through intelligence issues or noob issues) they can go play in the sandbox until they have the ability of getting to orbit without failing.

Did I miss somewhere that 0.24 is getting rid of sandbox mode?

Why is a game over/bankruptcy going to turn people off? I can't count the number of times I didn't win in Civilization, RR Tycoon, Sim City, or any number of other games. You know what I did in all of those games? On the main screen (even in KSP) there's a Start New game option. I know. Crazy idea. The concept of a new game. Or even multiple concurrent games. It's a revolutionary idea! It's not like you buy the game, and you get ONE chance to succeed, and if you don't you have to buy it again.

"You've never heard of the Kerbenium Falcon?"

I use SAS all the time, ESPECIALLY on ascents.

18:16 EDT A reload got me in. Edit: ..................and after reading a few posts up I see you guys know the issue.

Here was my Eve adventure. http://www.sidnaw.org/kerbal/evechallenge.htm Over in the challenges section, you'll see a couple other members' crafts as well.

Orrrrrrrrrrrr..... Switch vessels, and control from here/set target on the docking ports in question, and rotate both craft to align them correctly. Where is it written that you can never rotate the vehicle being docked to?

1. Start wearing clothes while playing KSP in .24 There are no other rules.

True, same goes for limiting terminal velocity and a few other things.

You can go into utilities and set autostage in MechJeb without using the ascent guidance.

Having never touched DRE, I have no idea what it does to change the dynamics of the challenge. Leader board updated. Well, it was jsut changing Morlock's score. I didn't notice this had been bumped back up, I might give this challenge another go now that I did my hit all bodies in career mode.

I also use a radial component when circularizing an orbit, and keeping the PE where it currently is.

Oh, I know, but a 32,000dV single stage with 4 million newtons of thrust, isn't one of them. Might as well hyper edit.

Better is a subjective term. When I look around "humanity" has not gotten better.

You're operating under the (possibly false) premise that technology or "progress" = better life. To paraphrase Ian Malcolm, what you call progress, I call the r-a-p-e of the natural world.

You can always try docking a couple large ships without RCS. Oh yeah, and the docking port has to be facing the same way the thrusters are on both ships.

Yeah, I mean, I could config file something to have a million dV a Kerbin TWR of 2 and keep the mass under 10t

Ships get named numerically [Destination][Number to destination] DunaOne, DunaTwo, DunaThree... JoolOne, JoolTwo... MohoOne... I'm setting up a constellation of KSO satellites named KerbComOne, KerbComTwo... Bases on bodies get named phonetically [body]Base[Letter at Destination] MunBaseAlpha, MunBaseBravo, MunBaseCharlie... DunaBaseAlpha... So far I only have bases on Eve, Minmus, Mun, and Duna.

Gettin ready to land on Tylo - stop number 3 of 5 on my Jool adventure in career mode.

Wall-E - without the leaving of the Earth That's where we will be in 100 years. Slovenly, lazy, blobs that do nothing. Oh sure, we'll have the Olympics and other sports to keep the lardos entertained, but we aren't going anywhere, because there won't be any ambition for anyone to do anything. We've already witnessed it over the past 40 years. The increase of technology has replaced ambition. Why physically do something when you go do it on your HD TV or computer monitor? Necessity is the mother of invention and progress, and we are needing less and less. We'll still be here on Earth, out of shape, apathetic, and doing a whole lot of nothing.

Yep. Post the persistence.sfs file somewhere. Download, dump into a folder resume saved, and voila.

Well, you are changing your inclination by almost 90, so it's going to take fuel. You can burn due north(or south) on Minmus rather than fully retrograde when leaving.

I use the small and large girders for pretty much anything interplanetary. My interplanetary engine core is usually a Rockomax-32 tank (or 2) with 4 girders mounted radially, and then another girder attached at 90º to each of those, with a nuke mounted off it fed with a fuel line. I go with that so I can keep "stacking" centrally underneath (lifting stage), or so I can drop empty tanks without losing the engines. I also will use girders when I get a bit too wide at the base of my first stage for struts. A couple of the long girders, then connected with struts keeps the engines from torquing, and causing the rocket to roll.. And struts...while not as necessary as they used to be, if you have clamp-o-trons you probably need to strut the sections together. Especially my current Jool vessel that has 5 sets of science packs for my reusable lander.