Tweety

Personally I would only really want buffering on the new parts to make sure it's of the same standard I'm accustomed to from you guys and maybe some optimisation so we can have shinier prettier textures and stuffs. If if in doubt do you're own thing I'm never disappointed but seriously just the aero will be fine. Tweety

It has taught me: 1) That despite everything I try 99% of the time I will forget at least 1 minor detail (panels or struts). 2) Deal with my ignorance/forgetfulness Tweety

Is it not worth the retrograde launch then Slashy? If my basic understandings are correct then wouldn't that only take a little extra Delta V? That way you don't actually have to reverse your orbit as such? You are far more knowledgeable than I am. I could also be thinking about it in completely the wrong way too Tweety Edit: Ahhhh eddie got in there while I was typing....NOW I understand why my idea is terrible Although I now have a great personal goal of having a clockwise orbit around as many planets as I can endure

How far have you progressed on the tech tree? I personally haven't played career in ages, however with a small probe core and some static panels you should be able to lift it and even put it in the required orbit with minimal costs. An SSTO should cut it with a small satellite on top. just get into LKO by going retrograde and you are mostly there. Maybe lift the satellite with the long black and white tank with an lv909 engine on bottom and some reaction wheels and ou should be able to get a Kerbin escape trajectory with delta V to spare to fine tune the orbit for the contract. When im at home tonight i will see if i can throw something low tech together to achieve what you need (at work right now). Tweety

I understand this completely. However if I buy an incomplete product after being warned it is incomplete then I can only expect an incomplete product. That being said SQUAD has done an absolutely fantastic job at making the game as bug free as possible and I have had very little to ragequit over except my own shortcomings. My only fear will be for SQUAD when 1.0 goes live and is marketed as a complete game, but that's another story. When you buy the game in early access, they state it is in early access and do not deceive you in any way about this. Suggestions and constructive criticism is the only way to proceed with the current product and development stage. When the full retail release goes live then go nuts (not that I have too many concerns anyway). Tweety

I too disagree with the tone of this thread. Yes I agree that there should be some formal place to express concerns about the game, which I'm sure SQUAD already know what they are up against, and how to move the game forward to a more enjoyable experience. SQUAD listens to us as a community so I have no doubt they will sort out what they can....providing its constructive and helpful. I would imagine they would be less inclined to look at this thread as it is now. Tweety

Is it a bad idea.....are you having fun? If yes then it's not a bad idea, if no then get back to the VAB. Hell I spend about 90% of my time in the SPH making stuff that will never get used, cause it's no good at what I want it to do and then I spend the other 10% of my time slapped together a rocket in the fraction of the time that can do the job....then I never use it anyway. I still love playing KSP even though I'm playing Groundhog Day essentially Me loves those kerbals! Tweety P.S 400+ hours and only been to the mun, minmus and duna

1. Get inspiration from imagination/forums 2. Try to emulate the aesthetics. 3. Fail hard on that and just try to emulate function. 4. Fail again and try something I think is cooler or better. 5. Probably fail again but still be pleased with that cargo plane that can circumnavigate kerbin with 9t of payload but can't get to orbit due to design/piloting limitations. 6. Start something new that will fail but get saved as one of my favourites again. Cupcakes dropships are my new inspiration to hack up and fail at. I always have fun though. Tweety

Hmmmm interesting. I would personally expect stock to look like the parts we currently have EXCEPT porkjet's parts and the SLS parts. I'm not saying they don't belong, I absolutely love those parts, just saying that look far more advanced than the original parts (does that even make sense?!). Stock on gameplay mechanics, contracts and planets etc, is exactly as I would expect. In the sense that 'hang on why do i have to rescue a kerbal when I'm the only space agency on the planet'. It's the sort of irregularities I would expect from KSP. I don't know why and how i go about explaining my thoughts though. Just to note, I DO have mods and have run stock for a while too. Before Porkjet's spaceplane parts were added I couldn't live without them, and I have recently add EVE and a visual pack purely for the look of a 'shiny new game'. B9 and other part mods I haven't ever used yet because I just don't think the visuals fit. Again no bias towards any mods, I just like what I like but I'm sure I will in the future. Tweety. Edit: Come to think of it I would imagine anything that has been in the game for a while makes that mechanic, part or whatever 'feel' stock. Docking ports were introduced in 0.18 which is when I started playing therefore are stock to me, but I'm sure to others they didn't 'feel' stock when first implemented.

I would strongly recommend astronomers interstellar v2 pack as well! It's like a whole new game. I added the skybox and lens flare from someone else because of personal preference but all the necessary mods are in the pack, you just add onto it what you like then. I will try and find the skybox and lens flare I'm using and update. Tweety Edit: found it, I used Proots skybox and lens flare, once the initial mods are installed you can just pick and change the actual visuals and textures from other modders. Link here.

Oh don't worry I'm currently looking at my current 40" 1080p Tv and wondering how I can justify buying a new one, to replace it, to my wife to be Tweety

I looked at CKAN and quickly found that the couple of things I really wanted made it look so good I kept adding to it....SO I decided to bite the bullet and install the whole pack....HOLY MOTHER OF KERBOL! It looks like a new game to me! Only downside, which most probably isn't related, is my monitor (Samsung 720p Tv, obviously limited to crap res) hates fullscreen but its no real issue running in a window. .....now which monitor do I want next.... Thanks guys for the replies and thanks Astronomer for making me NEED a new monitor Tweety

That's brilliant, cheers JackDraak for the reply and solution Many more hours will be played! Tweety

If this has already been asked and answered tell me where and I shall bother you no more. But is there a way to have just the planet shining on to my craft and lens flare without all the other gubbins. Since I dont wanna go mad with my stock install. I just want more pretty. Tweety Edit: I'm using 32bit if that makes a difference. My computer should handle it, only 1 month old, i5 4790k OC @ 4.2, only 8gb RAM but its DDR3 @ 2133 I think, and a GTX 970.

Welcome! Depends on your method of learning. Some people learn by watching someone else and others just by reading etc. Generally a good starting point is watching Scott Manley. He has some great tutorials. Any other questions fire away Tweety Edit: Very quick and dirty trainer rocket. Plenty of Delta-v (you only need 4500 for LKO(low kerbin orbit))

You have my vote on this one! Otherwise some of my designs may need retro rockets on for landing Tweety

Recently I haven't had to use more than 2 intakes per turbojet. That said i have 'air hogged' in the past with up to 10 intakes per engine. I'm now either better at designing craft or the shock intakes are actually better and have therefore been able to reduce 'air hogginess'. If in doubt add more engines with 2 intakes per engine and just action group some engines off when a flameout is about to hit: e.g if you have 4 engines and 8 intakes, shut down the outer 2 engines before flameout then you have 2 engines on 8 intakes without it looking like you have an intake with wings. The general rule is upto 15ton per turbojet, reduce that number to 12-13ton per engine and you will get far better performance (d'uh). Tweety

I'm not the only procrastinator! Although I do use timewarp I rarely have anything to timewarp with Tweety

What part of the game did you enjoy most last time? Rockets, spaceplanes, building contraptions or actually going to and landing on other planets/moons? if you're burnt out on one aspect give another a go. I love building stuff that never gets used. Others love using craft that others have built to fulfil their solar system conquering dreams because they hate the building phase. There's plenty to do and if in doubt build a sea faring ship....takes AGES (for me at least) and will log another 10-20 hours Tweety

I have a major tendency to build rockets planes, houses, cars, all sorts then never get round to using them in any way at all. I just love he building mostly. Hence why I have only ever gone to the mun, minmus and duna with over 400 hours logged Tweety

A lazy submission on my part, I done this purely as an exercise to see if my cargo plane could perform such feats. Turns out it can. It should qualify as there is no staging so even though I had to use some fuel from my payload I did not lose any other mass other than liquid fuel. Tweety

Very lazy admission to the Low Flyer Elite, All Stock and all I done was take out my trusty cargo plane no modifications were needed or done....hence the slow time....I was carrying 18 tons of fuel to refuel craft on the island Thanks for the challenge, I have attempted fastest time and lowest part count but just can't quite nail it. Maybe in another 2 hours Tweety

I have fits and starts when playing KSP I am normally always wanting more than my '2 hour' computer time imposed on me by my wife to be. On Sunday's I will invariably be on for hours at a time with breaks only for coffee/food Tweety

I'm reading this. Don't change anything for the sake of other people. After all its about your trials and tribulations with running YOUR space program Tweety

32 Bit is certainly not the death, or going to be, of KSP. I have played both versions modded and unmodded. Now all I'm interested in is 32 Bit unmodded, just 'cause. I CAN install linux if I really wanna, I just don't see a major NEED for it. I have a beast of a PC that I still haven't unlocked the potential of yet, and I still feel like 32 Bit is plenty enough for me right now. Tweety