DBT85

The Lite pack from SeveredSolo has two missions that generate for various bodies IIRC. This pack has specific orbits to reach for every scannable body in the game for Altimetry and Biome scans. I'm working on HiRes. This pack has rewards that will scale with the difficulty of the mission. On Normal A mission to scan Kerbin that should only cost you about 15,000 tops should net you about 25-30k in funds (can't remember exactly off the top of my head). Obviously if you are playing on hard you'll get less rewards because the game scales them down, I can't remember the scales involved. I've not done a fresh pass on rewards given yet so if you do play and have comments do let me know. As for difficulty, one of the missions asks you to hit an orbit on Laythe, Vall, Tylo, Bop and Pol with 5 separate vessels. Each within a 4km window for Ap and Pe and within an inclination window of 0.4 degrees and 0.2 degrees for Bop. A new version to come in the next week will move all orbit parameters to optional rather than required and have a balance pass over the rewards. This pack will also a) not offer you the contracts until you have the parts required to complete them not offer you a contract to scan Mun until you've done some of Kerbin, Minmus till you've done some of Mun and the rest of the solar system until you've done all three to about 90%. I might add something so that the mission after you've done Minmus isn't immediately "go to Jool" which at the moment can happen. I don't want to tie it too much to stock parts incase someone is using a new tech tree or make it dependant on having orbited something as the missions to the distant planets take long enough as it is, without having had to orbit them first before getting the contract.

Fine with both Squad saying they'll never add them in stock and with modders adding them themselves.

It doesn't matter what you call the ship. The contract system will recognise any ship matching all the parameters and know it as that name, but it doesn't change the ship name for you to see. Not sure if that's been added in yet.

Congratulations! Docking is always satisfying and it does get easier when you've done it a few times. I also use the Docking Port Alignment Indicator mod to get lined up properly.

Have a look at Contract Configurator and the various Contract Packs that people have made for it. There is also the option in there to disable certain types of stock contracts if you feel they are bothersome. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/101604

Sadly, and in my opinion, the training for docking provided in the game at this time is not nearly as good as it should be. Should be a small nimble probe ship with RCS that is easy to play with, not an unbalanced hulk as you are finding. There should also be a better alignment indicator. All the videos I find on YouTube are of peoples own custom machines docking rather than this one sadly. Off the top of my head I can't remember all the details of the vessels you are trying to dock in this tutorial, but just switching between them with [] wont give you any control if it needs a pilot. You'd have to EVA over, board, stabilise the other craft and then go back. Have to started playing with anything else in the game or are you still just going through the tutorials? The best advice I can always give is start a career on easy and watch Scott Manley videos on YouTube. He's just started a new series for 1.0.

Using both is too easy for me not to bother with. My contract pack was the first time I've ever done anything like that, used github, etc, and getting the files done to use both AVC and CKAN didn't take me long. Once it's on CKAN all I have to do is change the .version file and upload it with my new version zip and ckan will update too. Neither AVC or CKAN automatically update to the best of my knowledge. They just tell you that there is a new version and then you can do whatever you want. In your case you have only given dropbox links, while I'm guessing you probably use github like most. If you shared those github links a kind soul might just add the required file for you.

I can't play without KER now. The amount of information displayed when desired is too valuable. I also set it to that its always on and not requiring a part. For landings on planets for example, I can see exactly how much lateral movement I have. When building a rocket I can see exactly how much dV and TWR and more I have on each stage. So no more guessing whether I've got enough to get to orbit, or to Mun, or if one stage is strong enough to even accelerate after separation. When putting satellites into orbit I can see precise readings for orbit duration, inclination, etc etc. Most important of all, I can see how much dV I have left in each stage as I fly. So I can see just how much I have to spare once a manoeuvre is complete. Rather than starting the burn and finding I'm 10m/s short. It's an essential. It doesn't do anything for you apart from sums (and since I'm not a rocket scientist I'm ok with that), just provides the information for you to use.

Nice! I did wonder about something like this. I'll have a look!

When I was playing around with some SCANSat probes, I had the smallest Octo, a small RCS tank and 4 thruster blocks, with a couple of single cell solar panels on and one of the round small batteries. It's so light that the Mono will take you all over the place if you want to go.

I'm in.

Contemplating shifting the orbit requirements to be an optional extra, and removing the maligned orbit lines that are mostly useless for any orbit not equatorial or around Kerbin. EDIT: did this for my own save with the first mission last night and was happy with the result, so I'll roll an updated version out in the next few days.

Hoping to have a further play in the coming weeks and added. Having not played more than an hour of 1.0 thus far and not having played much at all in a few months, it's a bit like relearning a few things! Also want to look over what has been added or changed in Contract Configurator to see what might be useful.

0.5.2 is live now. Fixes that issue. Apologies! Just a typo on my part when putting them all in, and since I tested them all with little probe cores and RCS (yeah I flew them all manually!) I was able to hit it.

Apologies for the stupid absence. A load of stuff came up and I've been slammed. Only got around to trying 1.0 yesterday. This has been updated on GIT with a version that CKAN will now be able to install, might take an hour or so to appear on there. Hopefully I'll be able to get mroe time in the next few weeks and look at what nightengale has done with ContractConfigurator since I last looked. @severedsolo Apologies to you for not seeing your message or getting back to you. I of course have no issues at all with your work.

Sorry for my absence, loads of fun stuff going on outside of KSP so I've been busy! I didn't even think about the duration parameter needing to be on a vessel in focus so I'll remove it hopefully tomorrow.

I follow a couple on twitter, so yes.

Not quite sure I understand how. I mean, when aiming for the moon trying to eyeball it can be a bit of a giggle. But when trying to go anywhere else arriving and finding you're 100m/s short of orbit or landing is just infuriating, not fun.

Heat is good. I'd suggest any damage form it being off on Easy mode, on for Normal and maybe turned up a little for hard?

I have the CE edition pre ordered and can't wait. One of my favorite games of all time and I'm really looking forward to it, and Homeworld Shipbreakers when that eventually releases.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the issue with Proc Fairings. As I understand it, having proc fairings means you don't have to design your craft to fit inside a standard fairing. On the flip side, standard fairings limit you in ways that are unrealistic, as if a larger fairing was needed for a mission I'm sure it would be made for the mission in question provided the rocket makers said it would fly. A Proc fairing gives you the best of both worlds, if you want to make sure that your craft don't look ridiculous with huge bulbous fairings on tiny rockets, then don't design your payloads like that. Or just include proc fairings and have a toggle box that won't allow the fairing to extend more than 25% beyond the diameter of the proc fairing base being used at the time and include it as a default option on normal or hard mode. If Stevie McStevevison wants to try and launch a 5m wide fairing on top of a 1.25m rocket then let the game physics determine if it will work or not IF it's modelling things accurately then it will or won't fly accurately. It's not exactly hard for you to play to your own set of rules.

Its less about better performance and more about not running into a memory ceiling and the game bugging out as often.

Unity 5 will be updated for dx12 in time for Windows 10 launch.

will be keeping an eye on this

Just tried the latest dll from the master branch and its struggling with the multiple ExperimenalPart section. Maybe I'm doing it wrong. I have both my own code and the code copied from the wiki on using multiple parts, and the debug window is giving me this name = UnlockPart type = ExperimentalPart // The name of the part to unlock for the mission duration. part = crewCabin // part = probeCoreOcto2 // part = RCSTank1-2 // part = RCSBlock // part = dockingPortLarge // part = batteryBankLarge // part = largeSolarPanel } BEHAVIOUR { name = ExperimentalPart type = ExperimentalPart // The name of the part to add/remove. Can be specified multiple // times. part = largeSolarPanel part = cupola // Whether the part should be added as an experimental part (when the // contract is accepted). Also controls whether the part is removed // if the contract fails or is withdrawn. // Default = True add = True // Whether the part should be removed as an experimental part (when the // contract completes successfully). // Default = True remove = True } BEHAVIOUR {