fairytalefox

Boosting Isp or thrust is just stupid. More skilled pilots should be able to pilot BIGGER rockets. You want moar boosters (engines, passengers, docking ports, solar batteries)? You need better pilots. Best of the best ones can make anything fly. Also I think it would be good to limit the automatic probe cores in their ability to pilot things. Like, Tier I core can only work with up to X tons vessels and operate up to Y science tools. Tier II can do more, etc. And no "unlimited" cores: all really big missions have to be piloted.

I don't think names are relevant. I don't think these names are real at all. In my opinion, it's like some Chinese guys who live in China and do business abroad: "Hello sir or madam my name is (a bunch of musical sounds here) but you can call me Mike for your convenience". So we call them Jeb, Bob and Bill for our convenience. Other Kerbals have names which not always are English, but they always try to sound like English ones. You say some of them are definitely female. Because of my poor English I can't understand which names you're talking about, so I suppose Kerbals themselves (!) can't understand it either.

Guys, now I know the truth! Some of us (not me) see Kerbals as toon characters. Because, you know, they look like toon characters. Toons are mostly symbols rather than realistic depictions, so these people think of Kerbals as a metaphor for humans. Obviously humans are either males or females, so Kerbals are, too. Others (including me) see Kerbals as realistically depicted beings. Because, you know, in-game rockets, planets, moons and other things look quite real, so Kerbals most probably actually are (fictional but who cares) clumsy green bipedal entities who live far far away and barely can into space. Obviously they can't have attributes dedicated to Earth mammals, such as gender. (They probably also don't have DNA and cellular structure, and thus can't be classified as fungi, but one more time who cares).

They DO reproduce with spores. Who's Squad, why they dictate us their silly version of truth? I was at Kerbin many times, I know better. [insane_fanboy_mode=off] Actually, I just like Kerbals to be fungi. Come on, we have girls and boys all around the world, all around EVERY in-game world on the Earth. This idea has zero novelty value. Fungi, on the other side... all of us think it's something wrong with Kerbals, with their culture, mentality, civilization, with everything, am I right? It's because they're not green funny humans. They're lechers who ride cacti, trust me, guys and gals, I'm an engineer. I'm not happy with Squad to introduce Girlbals but I'm ok with it. My imagination is stronger than their propaganda.

Yes, I think so. Eyes, teeth, fingers (and probably some other small but importantbody parts) are of lichen while the main body is made from cactus... flesh? (Is it the proper word?) Their green body is near to undestructible and can live forever, so when Kerbals die, it means that only their lichen part is dead. Kerbals bury (or, more precise, plant) dead-yet-technically-still-alive bodies of their friends somewhere at Kerbin's desert areas.

I don't think we can talk to the original Squad. Well, we can ask questions but they probably won't even read them... All the Squad guys on this forum are from the KSP team which, I believe, has little to do with the primal marketing core.

I strongly believe that kerbals are sapient lichen parasites living on cacti.

Steam claims Skyrim and FarCry 4 to be sandbox games.

There is no such option in the poll, but I'm 7: unmanned one-way missions only (since probe cores become available), smallest payloads possible, potential two cents of recovery value are virtually invisible.

So the career mode isn't bad by itself, it's just, hmm, not polished yet. I believe it will be. Eventually. Soon .

I don't think it's a good idea to have such feature in the stock game. You can have parts in your ship that are not unlocked yet in another savegame. There could be a mess with ship names (like, same names in two different locations for two different designs). You can accidentally overwrite a stock ship. So many opportunities to shoot yourself in the foot. It can be a good idea for a plugin, though. You could try to ask someone in the appropriate forum.

So let's admit: the whole science- and funds-related part of the game is imbalanced. More precisely, there are no signs of balance at all. I'm not complaining, like, "OMG the balance is broken I have no challenge we're all doomed". I can edit configs and such. But guys, really, do you think it's ok and don't have to be fixed before release? I don't know, maybe it's a right approach, "build first, then adjust". I see a hole, I say "look, there's a hole!" That's all, no whine intended.

Second that. ...and by "kinda" we mean "terribly and horribly". Like, opening all the tech tree in ten missions. Unmanned since the first probe core became available. No return. One single 200 kg probe with 1 (one) science tool on board landed at Eve brings about 2000 science points. They jokingly call it "moderate difficulty". On the other hand, it still takes longer than Morrowind world record speedrun (about 3 minutes IIRC)

It's me again with "big corrections" issue. Can't 100% reproduce. Tried about ten transfers Kerbin-Moho in one game session. Usually it works like a charm, corrections are about 10-15 m/s. Last transfer missed 650 m/s. Different ships, same starting orbit (620 km). KSP 0.25.0.642, MJ 336, no other plugins, clean install, clean sandbox. It's dark ancient magic, apparently. I just don't know what else to blame. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Well, now I'm a bit confused. Actually I did some simple experiments in sandbox mode involving one of latest MJ dev builds and HyperEdit (no other plugins). Nothing extraordinary, just putting vessels directly to Kerbin's orbit and porkchopping right from there. The issue arouse, so I wrote my post. Now I've tried to reproduce my previous results to make sure I'm not hallucinating and, hmm, I just don't know what to think. The game does weird things like making planets orbiting a random point quite far from Sun, teleporting vessels on SoI change from Moho directly to Jool and such. Something is wrong with... something. I'll try to test things one more time with MJ only, so it can be kind of time consuming. I'll be back ASAP.

Oh, if this angle wants to be called "ejection" it's all up to it, I don't mind I just wonder if there is a way to make the porkchop calculator calculate only realistic trajectories. Or, at least, limit my choices to such trajectories. I think it would be better. If it's difficult to implement, or may cause glitches, or there is another reason to leave the algorithm intact, then of course low orbits and/or big corrections are my only options. No problem. The issue isn't a game breaker after all.

Hi again, sarbian and other devs and contributors, I want to say great thank you for all your work. The whole addon is a miracle. And the new porkchop transfer in particular is a miracle, too. Now I have a question about it. With that new transfer, we have two different moments of time. One is shown below the porkchop picture, and the other is the actual maneuver time. And they are different. For example, I like to start my transfers from 620 km (above Kerbin) circular orbit, so the difference may be about 20 minutes or even more. It's not a big deal if you want to visit Jool or Eeloo. Bot when it's a mission to Moho, you know, that unholy Moho is a pretty darn fast beast. So these 20 minutes at the initial orbit lead to, like, 200 m/s correction burn, or you'll never ever touch Moho's SoI. I'm aware of phase angles and such stuff, so my question isn't about roots of these minutes. The question is: is it just me? Or it's kind of probably minor real issue? Because, you know, not everyone of us always have these 200 m/s to spare in their pocket...

Dear dev(s), would you be so kind to draw something like an arrow pointing down on the new "drop down menu" buttons? Or maybe another symbol, or something else, just to make them look a little different than usual "instant action" buttons. IMHO it would be very convenient and not too difficult to implement.

What's the main feature of 0.25? 0.24 was all about contracts so "First Contract" worked well. Now I just can't figure out. Spaceplanes? Strategies? UI facelifting?

Space Ship One (Two, Three, ... One Brazillion) for actual missions. X-1 (2, 3, ...) for "experimental" vessels. I'm not too creative. PS. ...And X-1337 for some extremely ridiculous contraptions.

Kerbals don't have surnames. "Kerman" isn't a surname, it's something like "Mister". Prooflink

IMHO it would make sense to have navigation controls grouped in one navigation block.

I think it would be useful to have an ability to switch to another ship within physical range with GUI buttons. Something with [ and ] functionality but in the GUI, and an icon of the ship we're going to switch to wolud be nice. And make these buttons invisible when there is nothing to switch to. Just because all these "how do I rescue Kerbal" threads are not funny anymore.

This could be an idea for another suggestion. Besides experimental parts, we have contracts to test some already unlocked parts, too. It would be cruel to make these parts unstable. I'm not sure if this thread is a good place to discuss this idea, though.

This sounds like a good idea, too.