Zild

I like the lights suggestion, especially as I always try to have lights around my docking ports anyway. I might have to go for dual docking ports instead, though, as the alignment is guaranteed (barring upside-down!) Unfortunately I am always riding the part count limit as it is...

Yoink! (Well maybe not, but I am OCD about such things and have yet to come up with a solution for this one, so... )

+1 The exact same technique is used by some GPS systems to calculate speed (and also from that derive acceleration). GPS: More than just a positioning system!

It is simultaneously realistic and an exploit. This comes back to the age old argument of "realism vs good gameplay". Given that in the game you appear to pay Kerbals no wages (neither for Kerbonaughts nor ground crew), it seems perfectly reasonable to suggest you could get a few more slaves to dig up nearby ore for the process! Space centre running costs make be an interesting addition to career mode, though... But perhaps the most obvious workable solution would be to give ore a cost (and refund value) - this would only marginally impact people testing designs (if they actually choose to run the machinery as part of the process) but if priced correctly should make any exploit unprofitable. I have never used this (or any!) perk. It says negative reputation is calculated "per deal" - does this mean for example per launch, or per component? I mean does the reputation damage scale with cost? If so, this probably could be exploited using larger vessels...

It all depends how fast you are going. I have had it occur right down to the ground! Send a massive rocket straight up really really far, then straight back down, and it will have so much speed it will still be experiencing re-entry on impact. For 'chutes you can vary both parameters mid-flight as well. In general, if it is had a green bar or button you can change it. (Hint: after you unlock tier 2 R&D you can transfer fuel around your craft mid-flight in a similar way.)

I hate iPads, but I love both of these ideas. I could spend my lunchtime working on designs rather than reading the forums!

It is clear we will never reach consensus on this. At least we can all agree about the Kulcans and Komulans. (Kulkans and Kromulans? Aw damnit!)

(Is double-posting frowned-upon in this context? Seems too long has passed to justify editing my previous post...) I did a few missions with my existing 4-seat rescue craft last night and the financials worked out as follows: Mission 1: Three low orbit rescues: Total cost of launch (re-usable parts, non-re-usable parts and fuel): ($33,000) Total salvage value (re-usable parts, assuming no remaining fuel): $9,000 Total contract income: 3x $30,000 = $90,000 Net profit (loss): $66,000 Mission 2: One low orbit rescue and three tourists (mix of sub-orbital/orbital): Total cost of launch (re-usable parts, non-re-usable parts and fuel): ($33,000) Total salvage value (re-usable parts, assuming no remaining fuel): $9,000 Total contract mission income: 3x $6,000 + 1x $30,000 = $48,000 Net profit (loss): $24,000 Note the above figures are approximate and pessimistic. For example, I have taken the final completion funds for rescues but there may be some milestone payments as well (i.e. when you first pick up the rescuee). I think the profit earned from each tourist was 2-3 times the amount shown (I was not paying that much attention!) In any case still profitable. Even a poor rescue mission picking up a single Kerbal more than covers its costs.

I can't tell if people are joking or being serious in this thread... The problem here has to be the 'chutes getting ripped off. It is obvious. At least - like so many of the perils in KSP - it is obvious after the first time you see it happen to you! (I am not ruling out the prospect of other problems too, but this definitely WILL be a problem.) Adjusting the deployment pressure higher may help - I have not actually tried it, but I trust the person who said it first in this thread because everything else he said appeared true and correct. Adjusting the deployment altitude will NOT help! It seems 'chutes actually get deployed in two parts - the pressure affects when they are initially released (after which they can be burned / torn off by airflow), the altitude affects when they bloom (spread out, becoming more effective at slowing you down). The first phase slows you down a little, the second phase slow you down a lot. My actual advice would be to separate the craft AFTER re-entry, maybe around 10-15km. (Also, try going for final burn when re-entry friction starts fading away rather than so early, as this should bring your final speed much lower than burning before the re-entry friction - you can take a lot of re-entry friction punishment, so you might as well make use of the free aero-braking). If you can't or won't do that then definitely experiment with the deployment PRESSURE settings. Altitude can probably stay where it is for now (I have not yet had to adjust it). I was actually running into similar problems trying to salvage my early lift stages with automatic 'chutes (saving the planet and money at the same time!) so I will have to play with the deployment pressure settings on those when I get home. As for the person who said this was probably a bug... Damnit, there are plenty of genuine bugs out there to complain about, stop inventing new ones just because you don't know how physics works!

Not Klingals then? Nor Klingols? I like Klingols...

Surely Bill as punishment?!

1: Good for them. I am happy to see KSP get a wider audience and Squad get more money. 2: I do hope they get the PC version back to a stage where people are happy with it before focussing too much effort on PS4 (as opposed to dropping all PC dev work whilst they do the port). 3: It will be interesting to see how they handle porting of some features. Which, unfortunately, is a polite was of saying they are going to have some substantial work on their hands, which means more PS4 port work and less resources for PC dev work. Bit of a mixed bag there, but can't blame them for making the decision.

Tell me about it! I've sometimes had to raise my voice and tell him to go sit in the Naughty Capsule...

I never thought of that particular exploit... A very small tweak to some of the missions to make them unexploitable could be handy. For example, make "collect science data" missions one-time only deals (like the World First Record Orbit the Mun mission). If this makes it too hard, you could add one-time missions for each type of science in each location (e.g. you could have a mission for crew report in high orbit, then later a mission for temperature scan in high orbit). Might as well strip out all the space centre science, and missions for tests on the launchpad as well. (Although who hasn't misjudged one of those and killed a Kerbal at least once?!) You know, this could probably be handled initially as a mod, and it is one I would be interested in working on.

Probe cores: Stayputnik. Capsules: Mk1 Command Pod, Mk1 Cockpit. Engines: LV-T30, LV-T45, LV-909, Skipper and Poodle. No Jet engines. Batteries/Solar: Z-100 only. Not even the most basic solar cell (which I think comes at the same time as the Probodobodyne core...) RCS: None. Seriously, I am doing this VERY early in career; my biggest achievement so far this career is a Mun flyby. Not even a Mun orbit! I suppose I could have gone for Probodobodyne and solar cells instead of Rockomax thrusters, Rockomax fuel tanks and Hitchhiker storage... ...were it not for this! I can't fly straight to save my life, so I much prefer manned missions. (Obviously I am nowhere near the tech for SAS modules yet.) That, and my wife starts hitting me if Jeb isn't in the crew. I still think it works out well, as I get to use the extra seats for tourists and Bob to pad out my science. High orbit rescue missions look to be a different story, however... I wonder if a separate ferry ship to bring them back to my existing rescue ship would be a good idea (except I have no way to refuel it yet...)

Which in my case still happens frequently enough that I wish I knew the answer! I think I am sometimes getting a little short on delta-v, which gets me flustered and makes me try to take shortcuts. Shortcuts never, ever work... I miss this so badly, but have yet to unlock it in career. Rescues without it are possible, but much more hit-and-miss. (Without the actual hitting - that would actually be an improvement!) Any more details on this, or any input from others on your rescue ship designs? I only have the default capsule and the hitch-hiker module so far, greatly limiting my options. This is why I usually combine multiple tourist and rescue missions, to maximise cost-effectiveness when having to lift the hitch-hiker module. I originally tried probes with a empty single-seat capsules but am still so low in tech that either electricity or stability or both (usually both) tended to be an issue. I tried a ship with two capsules (one for pilot, one for rescuee) on it one time but it resulted in the Kraken eating the rescuee, the pilot, and Kerbin...

In my last game rescuing them proved rather costly for me - I felt compelled to buy an upgrade to the barracks (or whatever it's called!) to store all the little s****s! What does happen to them if you rescue them and have nowhere to put them, I wonder?! I got a lot of money and reputation that game by sending 2-3 tourists up and rescuing 1-2 Kerbals every mission. It also let me pad out my science with some of the repeated MysteryGoo / Materials Study collections, both in space and at the various landing locations. (Just don't ask how it ended, poor Jeb... In fact he is scheduled to do the first rescue mission of the new play-through tonight... ) Nobody can tell you what a successful docking manoeuvre is, you must experience it for yourself.</Morpheus> I think after one or two successful docking manoeuvres you come to understand what works and what doesn't and it becomes much easier from there. The same applies to rendezvous... rendezvouses... rendezvouii? (Somebody help me out here!) Unfortunately until you figure out what works it is a very painful process. Even following guidance from a Scott Manley vid I very nearly gave up. I do wish you could see the conditions of the rescue target before selecting it; the game gives this kind of facility for visual surveys, and sometimes for probe launches, doesn't it? I imagine this is even more important for "rescue x from orbit around the sun" missions...

Nobody planning an overhead console? Realistic, atmospheric, and above all the only thing I can fit in the tiny area around my desk!

Yeah. The human is only there for insurance purposes, and the controls just to make the spectacle more convincing.

From a business perspective this makes zero sense. Yes in business it can be right to take all-or-nothing risks, but in this case you have the "nothing" risk without the "all" reward; what do you stand to gain from this risk that you could not otherwise get through safer means? On the other hand if you are looking for a reason to reset (as I always do when I accidentally kill Jeb) then that's a different story altogether!

Nice suggestion, but I for one have no spare time - it all gets sucked up by KSP! (On the other hand I do have plenty of money*, as I am too busy playing KSP to spend it on anything else! ) *Oh how I wish this were true...

I want this for my brother's next birthday...

Nah, the buttons are neither big enough nor colourful enough for KSP. We need something even more ridiculous looking! (Also, if that is a giant grey button, it needs to be recoloured red. The same as I plan to recolour my keyboard's spacebar red for KSP...)

I just do not understand all the difficulty... Then again, I was playing with Better Than Starting Manned and Deadly Re-entry before V1.0 which seemed to introduce similar challenges. If your primary focus is on "getting something to go straight up" I say skip the fins and go for gimballed engines. And make sure they are manned, by a pilot. Without a pilot for SAS you have no chance. Long-term fins may prove a more efficient answer, but using gimballed engines will at least prove that things can go straight. You can worry about efficiency afterward.

Thank you. That is all.