Norpo

"Build a Planetary Base on Eve", from FinePrint. Eleven kerbals? Nah, not that many have disappointed me THAT much to be put on the purple prison... In theory if I just dropped 3 hitchhiker containers on eve with a research station, an antenna, power, and a docking port, it'd count, hey, it can support eleven kerbals, it doesn't need that many inside to prove it! It needs a name though... Needless to say, I didn't accept this one. (also, the bold text explaining what it is says "zero" kerbals on the surface of Eve... oops)

I never use asparagus nowadays, mainly because SRBS are WAY cheaper. If I was playing sandbox, or had to, say, maybe get off eve or tylo then I might have to use asparagus, but I haven't used it in a very long time. I generally just have a core (orange tank + mainsail/whatever), and 4 boosters for my first stage of basically every lifter I make. Edit: And if you need to know why I need that big of a first stage: the answer is this: The K.S.V Red Lumal. The pilot, Lumal Kerman can be seen screaming. I'm not sure why he's always doing that...

This: I just experienced this yesterday, in orbit around Duna with a science probe. When I opened my science report the word "Discard" just flew off (It was a little slow). I was too busy laughing to take a screenshot! I wonder if how fast it flies off is based on relative velocity to the parent body, or something else? "The space discard monster roams around those who do science..."

Throw a probe at some random planet and hope it works. I haven't been everywhere yet, so it's more of an experience. I've mainly explored duna and ike, (landed on moho with a probe once), but now I have a giant lander probe going to Eve. I can generally design a lifter quickly enough to get a small probe into orbit, so it's fairly simple. I had a moho lander, its solar panels weren't autotracking so it couldn't do a crucial manouver. So, when I finally COULD use it, I changed it's course. It is now en route to eve. Or duna. I forget which. I hope not duna because I just landed a small probe there already. Of course, the fact that it was on a giant slope doesn't help things. I had to tumble it down for 10 minutes before I could get it standing upright... mostly Image taken while it was tumbling down, I think it peaked at 4 m/s or so. Scary.

I wish there was a blast awesomeness modifier in the options. (Blast awesomeness modifier: Default: 1x, Goes from 0.10x to 10x. Multiplies Blast Awesomeness numbers to this level, for bigger, more awesome explosions.) Are you listening devs? I can just see this happening... *hacks modifier to 1000x* *drops smallest structural piece from orbit* *game skips to cutscene of atomic bomb blowing up, then kerbin being split in half* Flight results: Structural Strut impacted Kerbin: Cannot launch vessels as Kerbin is undergoing climate change due to half the planet exploding and Land Krakens which were previously hiding underground now swarm the planet. The KSC is taking preventive measures. To repair kerbin, spend 10 trillion trillion funds.

[ spoiler=SpoilerTitle ]What You Want In The Spoiler[ /spoiler ] Without any spaces inside the brackets, so [ /spoiler ] would actually be . Replace SpoilerTitle and What You Want in the spoiler with whatever you want.

70km for bare minimum (if, say, I need to test if something can *barely* get into orbit), 75km for a safe orbit, 100km for space stations (so if i'm a bit behind, I can still lower my orbit a little bit to get ahead) Those are generally my goals for orbits.

There are KSP mod managers? This is new to me. These modders rock. I just remove/extract from gamedata, once with disasterous results (deinstalled a minor mod with a part from it still attached to a major space-station, didn't quicksave. oops. Space-station disappeared.) Other than that though, I haven't had too many problems with it. I dump all my removed mods into an "old mods" folder however, just in case I need to add em back in and I don't feel like re-downloading.

The fact that outsourced R&D is unbalanced is a very common topic of conversation. Current fix I have: I simply don't use it, some people have edited the configs to make it balanced though, but I haven't done that. Simply put: it's VERY unbalanced, to the point that pretty much 99.9% of the player-base thinks so. I haven't used it simply by player stories! EDIT: Oh, it doesn't say 33,496 credits, it says 33.496 credits. That's a decimal point.

Messed with launch clamps, cupolas, and IVA. FUN.

(see above post for what he's quoting: my previous post) You can actually already make your own scenarios, in the saves file in the kerbal space program folder, theres a folder called scenarios. Scenarios are just persistent files, so I imagine all you have to do to make one is simply drop a persistent file into the scenarios folder. I may be wrong though. The only thing missing would be prebuilt-vessels, and I think scenarios work like this: Note, I may be wrong on this: 1. When you go to the scenarios tab, it shows the PERSISTENT (save) files. 2. When you play a scenario, it makes the save folder. This allows you to pick up your progress. The save folder contains the scenario persistent, and in every other way is just a new save file, as though you created a new save normally. The only thing different is that the persistent it starts out with isn't blank, it contains vessels, etc. prebuilt. 3. If you quit, you can reset a scenario (Deleting the folder). If you don't, when you play it again, it just uses the folder as a reference. All it takes to make a fan-made scenario right now, I believe, is a persistent file, and you could place ships etc. in orbit around wherever you want using HyperEdit, or just manually if need be. The only thing missing to make custom scenarios with "goals" is the actual goal system, everything else is there. Of course, you could just suggest a goal, there doesn't need to be an official scoring, this IS Kerbal Space Program, after all. Installing a custom scenario is really as easy as simply dropping a file into a folder, just like downloading a mod, so it's not as though it's obscenely hard to do it at all. I could see people making scenario packs, or other things as well. I just haven't seen them, though i'm sure there are some around.

This: A good landing speed is generally under 7 m/s. Any higher and regular parts go boom. If you have landing legs (which I hope you do) then are they deployed? Double click the green gear icon on the altimiter (thing on the top that shows how high up you are), it's on by default, but landing legs are not, so you'll need to click the gear icon twice to activate them. Also, tipping over and then exploding generally means your center of mass may be too high. Is it a short lander or a tall lander? Try to make landers as short and stocky as possible. Either that, or you're landing on a non-flat area, or you may not have enough control (or WAY too much) with reaction wheels. (also, some information on where you're landing may help, Kerbin or the Mun/Minmus, or somewhere further out, like Duna or any of the other planets?)

To the tl;dr crowd: the short version is at the bottom of the post. I could see improved scenario modes being implemented easily, as everything SQUAD needs is there. They could also have a bit of a story element to make it more of a story element (as you suggested) There's already scenarios (like the mun return, Station One etc.) that are mostly neglected, and contracts. If you combined the two, a scenario with a custom contract, then it could make for some very interesting challenges. Of course, you'd also need a way to disable some features (e.g the VAB, or maybe NOT deactivating the VAB in some scenarios, etc. depending on the scenario) An example scenario could be, say, a Tylo lander is landed and can get into orbit. However, it would be a very low orbit. To escape jool, and get back to kerbin, you'll need to go to the Tylo refueling depot, and then use that fuel to get to the Laythe refueling depot etc. The ultimate goal would be to return to Kerbin. example: The Duna Mothership Mark IV is in Low Duna Orbit. Jebediah Kerman, and his crew, are inside. However, it is completely out of fuel. The Ike Lander however, had a TON of spare fuel inside. However, as it seems to always go, the Ike Lander is on ike. You must return it to the mothership, and refuel it. The Ike Lander is unmanned, so you can discard it after using it to refuel the mothership. Your contract is to return Jebediah, Bill, and Bob Kerman back to Kerbin's land, and recover them. Should any of the kerbals die, the contract is failed. If they choose to go REALLY overboard with it, they could add things such as ordering (Go to laythe, THEN return to kerbin), or even scoring (Your score is based on time, fuel left etc.) As it stands, these scenarios can already be made, but with contracts, an additional layering could be added. TL;DR: Story mode could really be a set of scenarios with set goals, using contracts.

And I came here thinking this would be another person confused about the island runway. I was wrong, carry on. I do get this bug sometimes, but it appears briefly and then it goes back to normal. I haven't had it stay like that, before, though. "We build a pump to get laythe's oceans into kerbin! That solves the fact that.. uh.. The oceans are too small? Wait, no, it was giant before. I guess now we're just making it bigger!"

Now, if there was a system like DangIt, with random failures, now then there would be a reason for it. The higher level your kerbal is in repairing (X), then it could take less materials to repair, or repair it "better" (takes more time for it to fail again) Or, if there was a system where repairs take TIME, then there could be a reason for stations. Engine fail? Try to bring it to a station with Mechanic Billy-Bobdock, and he'll repair it in a day or so. I just don't want the ISP/Thrust to change, even if it's just a little bit. Sure, it's a reason to keep them alive, and that's all well and all, but i'd rather it be implemented in a different way, mainly because I can see it being exploited if done improperly, or simply making it not fun. I'd rather prefer a system where parts that are up in space for a LONG time (and i'm not kidding about long, unless it's a permanent spacestation or on a grand tour, or perhaps eeloo you shouldn't have to worry about this) can slowly decay in grade, causing them to either become less effecient, less reliable etc. and if you have a kerbal on board, it can slow this down, or even stop it dead in it's tracks if it goes below a certain point. e.g Jeb can slow down Engine Thrust Decay by 50% if he's on board, Bill can limit Gimbal Decay to 5% (so if it would go below 5%, bill stops it) etc. Only large problem with this is probes, but really, even in real life unmanned probes get damaged overtime. From the Hubble Space Telescope FAQ: The radiation that Hubble is exposed to in space also causes some degradation to its instruments, though this is mitigated since the instruments have regularly been replaced throughout Hubble’s life. This suggests that Hubble has been repaired, which could be something implemented in KSP. I can see it being very annoying if you have to repair every satellite you sent up in your giant satellite network every 5-7 years or so, though. tl;dr: Kerbal experience would be cool if they could prevent parts from failing, but before that, SQUAD would have to implement parts decaying, and that could cause problems and/or be hard to implement right, or simply be frustrating if done badly.

Well, if that's jeb, then bill or bob could of removed it because they were sick of him smiling. All. The. Time. That may seem okay now, but imagine being on a Grand Tour of all the planets stuck with him. That would be at least 5 kerbin years with him.. Smiling... Constantly... Does he ever BREATHE? Guess not. At least he's not as bad as Mortimer Kerman's old look, before the devs stopped impending nightmares. For those who forgot: Yeah, I think mortimer wins this round.

Remember, THAT'S why you don't look directly at the sun. Don't become... ...Moho man. Nice find, by the way. Now then, onto the REAL question. Is moho man making a D: face or an O: face? This question will puzzle Kerbal philosophers for centuries!

Someone should prevent me from ever making a space station ever again. This failure REALLY takes the cake. 4 Kerbals perished, and at least 30k funds down the drain (hey, i'm stingy, I need those funds for a giant duna mothership!) EVERY SINGLE TIME I try to make one in career, it fails. Horribly. Kerb Station I made it to space, but I didn't have enough to circuralize, so they all.. crashed to their doom, I quicksaved and saved one of them. But this time, I didn't have quicksaves. This time was gonna be different. I was gonna make a space station! It was gonna be awesome! And it was gonna have a purpose other than looking cool, cause I had a FinePrint contract! I even had a name for it, Space Station Fortitude. It was going to have modules attached to it and everything. Who needs emergency parachutes? Nah, this won't be like last time. It's totally reliable. I've done dozens of launches like this setup before. This is what happened after I seperated the boosters. (Before I started taking pictures, I realized the ship was going haywire. I tried desperately to fix it, to no avail. I had SAS modules on the ship, and it was fine before... Then I realised I couldn't even seperate the last booster, SAS wouldn't turn off, I didn't know what was happening. Then, it hit me. The cockpit fell off. Oops.) (Heres the link to the actual imgur album on imgur, because albums don't like fullres albums apparently when they're embedded and I was too lazy to crop them: http://imgur.com/a/Q2LXu#0 ) Weirdly enough, I remember all the kerbals being scared from the moment I launched it.. It's like they knew.

Have you staged it correctly? The parachutes may be on the beginning stage. In the construction, look to the staging, are parachutes at the bottom? If so, drag them to the top of the staging.

I haven't used spaceplanes much, so take this all with a grain of salt. I take no responsibility for VABs destroyed, kerbals lost, or kraken enraged by following this advice. Even when at low throttle? You shouldn't be at max throttle all the time, and if you are, then you should lower throttle at LEAST a minute before you land. As a general rule (this is for stock, but I think it may work for FAR as well), turn up so the wings are producing a lot of drag. Generally, just keep throttle off (or very low) when you're landing, and you should be good. With 260 m/s, you can just glide to the runway provided your wings are good enough. (For FAR, if you go too much up, then you may get your wings torn off thru aerodynamic failure, or get in a stall. Don't go all the way up, I speak from vague memories using FAR) By the time you've killed enough speed, you should be coming in at around 120 m/s, tops. Land straight horizontally, then when your landing gear have all touched the ground, hold down B (to brake). You should be slowing down. tl;dr don't have your jet engines on all the time, I may be wrong.

I don't really worry about debris, I don't encounter it too often, and if it starts lagging my game then i'll probably just terminate it, but, I do use sepratrons for clearing boosters away from my ship, otherwise the boosters sometimes roll into the ship and blow up a large part of the rocket, which has caused too many missions to fail, so now I ALWAYS put sepratrons on the boosters, even if I think they'll be fine. In the past i've sometimes just slapped a few onto the command pod, if I decouple just the pod, then sometimes I can get a bit of extra Delta-V from the sepratrons by activating them after the decoupling. Sometimes all you need to get home from the mun is 100 m/s extra delta-v.

Yeah, this happened too in my game, I EVA'd jeb out of a stationary capsule on the launch pad, he fell out, hit the ground, then, BAM. Hell kraken shows up, screen goes black, the whole show. I need to restart the game, in the tracking station the capsule on the launch pad and jeb are gone, and he's missing in action. Seems like a common-ish error, though certainly not routine. I'll probably bring him back by messing with the persistent file, but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Best I can figure jeb clipped through the ground or something, and the game freaked out. I haven't seen it happen in space yet.

I really like the planned resource system, while many will probably disagree with me (and rightfully so) I think that it'd make some interesting solutions to otherwise no-win scenarios, I just hope that they make the modules heavy, so it's not just a "slap on and forget until you need it" kind of thing. It should be an integral part of the mission, and not just a thing you put to the side. I could see it unbalancing some things if not implemented right, but they did say it would be endgame content. It'd also make planetside bases more independent from Kerbin, all that needs to be shipped once you get the resource modules there is the hardware, space tugs, ships, etc, as well as MAYBE a new resource harvesting module, if they could break or become inoperable. It'd be interesting to see if there were certain engines you couldn't get the fuel for, or if most engines wouldn't work with the harvested resources. That way it'd require more planning, perhaps, and become less of an end all solution to "i'm lost in space but I have a resource harvesting module how do I get home", it'd be interesting if it wasn't just harvesting liquidfuel/oxidizer mixes, but also another fuel, let's call it Spaceium, just in theory, and there were some engines that could only run on Spaceium, or tanks that could only have Spacium? Also, this raises another opportunity, harvesting resources/spacium in space, and bringing them back to kerbin. If this was possible, how effective would it be? Would you just sell it automatically for funds, or would it be added to an inventory of sorts where you could actually fill up tanks with the deep-space fuel/spacium? Or, more complicated, adding it to an inventory with the additional possibility to sell it? These could all be interesting gameplay mechanics, although it'd be hard to balance. I'm most excited for the resource harvesting, if only for seeing what squad will actually do with it.

Yeah, i'm having the same issue. I was really struggling, until I sent something to the Mun, and then I could afford everything. It might change later, when I have to scrape up the cash to go to duna, but I don't think it will. same situation, 30k funds, then went to mun, now i'm rolling in the funds like scrooge mcduck in a room of gold.

A jool mothership. It was assembled in LKO, but as I recall a new version came out after I completed it and I started a new save. I'm fairly certain it never left LKO. Shame, too, that thing was big and probably could of landed on at least 2 of the moons with it's external lander.