Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by EnDSchultz

  1. Are there any known issues with 1.4? Right now I'm running 1.4 (x64) and the Habitat function on modules defaults to Off when reloading a craft. So my Kerbals instantly go on strike and there's no way to re-enable the habitat and restore functionality.
  2. I understand one of the common (and legitimate in my experience) criticisms of Career mode is that it's grindy - completing random contracts to put useless satellites into useless orbits, or extract 10,000 units of ore from Eve to deliver to Gilly, or build a base with 5,000 units of liquid fuel on Moho... in order to earn enough money to fund missions you actually want to do. I find this is primarily a problem towards the late game, where A. The solar system really opens up and enters "sandbox" mode. Early on your sources of funding (Make orbit, plant a flag on the moon, etc) often coincide with your personal missions, but later on you often want to do things completely different from the contracts offer. B. Your crew roster is large (especially gets out of hand when trying to build permanent colonies and bases) and hiring new crew is prohibitively expensive. C. Rockets and hardware for more ambitious missions become exponentially larger and astronomically expensive. Especially when using things like life support mods that force you to bring much more mass along for long duration missions. The first problem can be at least partially addressed with the various contract packs and mods like Strategia. The second can partially be offset by rescuing Kerbals from contracts. The last can be partially managed by developing reusable launchers. I personally have been tinkering with SpaceY in my latest career, however I am so far unconvinced that this SpaceX style RTLS reusability is particularly viable given the mass fractions of KSP rocketry. For reference, in real life Elon Musk has stated that a Falcon 9 first stage pricetag ranges in the tens of millions of $$$ (I don't remember the exact number but we'll say ca. $50mn), whilst the propellant for the entire stage only runs you about $200k. Thus, notwithstanding the inevitable expenses of recovery and refurbishment, you are recovering nearly all your losses by bringing the first stage back. Now, upfront I admit I'm a pretty terrible rocket designer, but in my career I developed a SpaceY booster capable of sending a 3-Kerbal capsule into LKO (basically an orbital shuttle). It consisted of a RTLS SpaceY 3.75m first stage, and an expendable stock 2.5m second stage. The cost of the first stage alone ended up coming out roughly 70,000 for the hardware, and 25,000 for fuel. And here's the rub: For 25,000 credits, it turns out I could easily have built a barebones 2.5m expendable first stage instead - two orange tanks and a mainsail - capable of imparting more delta-V to the payload. So with that, I solicit the brilliant KSP community for thoughts. Am I just a terrible designer? Is SpaceY not actually balanced with career practicality in mind? Or are there advantages to RTLS reusability that only begin to manifest at larger scales (5m)?
  3. Thanks for the quick reply. I've got some fairly good news for you. The issue with the contracts not appearing is as you say. If I decline enough offered contracts it seems the probe contract will eventually get added (though I sometimes need to decline a lot of them). As for the problem with Boldly Go, it looks like the issue crops up if I take a bunch of science readings and then spam the "transmit" button on all the dialogues that come up - e.g, because I'm using a mod that automatically activates science components when able. As I mentioned, I only noticed that the notification for the reward wasn't showing up. Since a lot of other rewards (milestones, etc) often go along with the first science from a new planet, I couldn't tell if the funds were failing to be allocated as well or if it was only the notification getting lost Whatever the case, it seems that as long as I only take and transmit a single science reading at first, I get the +200k reward for a new celestial body like I'm supposed to.
  4. Well, I really love this mod, but ever since I upgraded to KSP 1.1.2 (and I've upgraded Strategia and all dependencies to the latest versions), I'm not getting any contracts generating at all when I accept a Probe strategy. The contract should show up in the Active list, correct? Furthermore, To Boldly Go III is notifying me it's giving me the +50k for science from new biomes, but not the +200k for science from a new planet. Has KSP 1.1.2 seriously FUBAR'd something? :s
  5. I'm getting this problem as well when updating using the patcher. It's annoying to have to redownload the whole game every time a patch is released (especially now that it's double the size it used to be) but it seems the patcher cannot be trusted to do the job properly. Alas. Will report back once I've downloaded off the Store. Edit: Problem seems resolved after overwriting my install with a full download of KSP 1.1.2 off the store. Looks like the patcher was indeed to blame.
  6. Hey Ferram, In the latest build it's looking like the "Allow Aero Failures" option is getting re-activated any time I revert or return to the space center.
  7. Would it be too crass of me to say I want 64 bit before anything else? As of 1.0, the game's memory footprint has become so large that it doesn't take very many mods at all to make it crash frequently from OOM. Before we talk about adding new stuff (especially beautification like detailed planets to make surface exploration more interesting) this elephant in the room needs to be addressed. Sooner or later.
  8. As if nobody's tried to build this one before. Nevertheless, this is my amateurish attempt at the Reaction Engines "Skylon". This is the passenger variant, with possible cargo model in the future. I took a few liberties to get it to fly and actually make orbit. It's made with minimal mods (Custom Landing Gear and FAR. Stock aerodynamics still too draggy). Aerodynamic instability is...minimal and is primarily a problem only in the subsonic range. I'm sure somebody else could have done a better job, but I'm proud of it because FAR has destroyed just about everything else I've tried to build.
  9. I'm currently experiencing a crash on startup. I think I've narrowed the culprit down to the EVE module (the BoulderCo folder).
  10. I suppose I'm just bad with this. Need to trim down my planes or something. My second SSTO spaceplane is a ~65 tonne monstrosity which, while it does have a payload bay, I'm not convinced would be able to take anything of significant weight. Granted, I'm trying to do it with turbojets and aerospikes, but I'm running Career and haven't unlocked the RAIPERs yet.
  11. It sure IS possible. I've managed with Tech 5 parts. It's ugly, heavy, overbuilt, carries no payload whatsoever and it pretty much requires a perfect ascent profile... but it goes up and can even come down again if you're super careful and employ airbrakes copiously:
  12. That's an awesome goal to have! Most people your age don't have a clue. It's not easy getting there, though. You have to want it and be willing to put in a lot of effort to get through the educational hurdles. Best of luck to you!
  13. December 20, 2011. So that looks like it would be 0.13 I don't remember exactly when I accomplished anything. But gosh, it's been quite the journey watching KSP change and grow.
  14. Well, I'd say this whole topic of 1.0 has pretty much been bludgeoned to death but I'm going to contribute anyway. The question a dev should ask themselves about 1.0 is this: If catastrophe struck the day after the release, and no more development could be done, would they be happy? Would they say the program is up to snuff and safely stands on its own as a complete product? Are the features all been implemented with sufficient depth? Have the bugs been squashed? Is it polished and shined up and refined? How favorable an impression would an impartial, unbiased newcomer have of the game? This is crucial. A 1.0 release is going to attract a lot of publicity, a lot of new customers, and a lot of scrutiny. Regardless of how much the devs intend to expand the game post-1.0, this will likely be the point of judgement. So, as for your question, here's why we should care: By my estimation, the financial success- or failure -of the 1.0 milestone is going to have a direct and significant impact on how much development and expansion Squad will be able to afford moving forward. And that, in turn, is going to determine how much bang we players will ultimately get for our buck. And the financial success of 1.0 is going to be determined by how complete and polished it is as a game at that point. And I don't think it's complete and polished enough to be called a complete, "finished" game. Not yet.
  15. So, Bill Kerman is a Level 2 Engineer. According to his skill sheet in the crew lounge, he's capable of repairing wheels and repacking chutes. However, in attempting to repack wheels on a rover it's telling me he needs to be level three. Is this just a typo in the tooltips?
  16. How's the inclination? It seems like it needs to be within half a degree or so.
  17. Running 32 bit. So I might have stumbled upon a bug regarding contracts. I think it's related to satellite missions. Here's what happened prior to the bug showing up: I accepted a contract to put a satellite into orbit. At this point I went into the VAB and noticed that hitting the Load Craft button did nothing. I presumed this was as designed as part of accepting the contract. I built a ship consisting of a launcher, a crewed Mk. I pod, and a simple satellite attached to the top of the pod via 1m decoupler. Went up, got into the specified orbit, and released the satellite. Unfortunately the decoupler force sent it flying off into oblivion at a very high speed. So I deorbited the manned portion of the craft. I'm still unable to load any saved ships, I suppose because the contract isn't complete. Also, on the launch pad I can only select vehicles with a probe core. So I canceled the contract and figured I'd come back to it later. Unfortunately, I am still unable to load saved vessels or launch ones without probe cores. I tried terminating the wayward probe core in the tracking station and successfully completing a second satellite contract in hopes of jarring the system, to no avail. Unless I'm on the totally wrong track, it would seem it isn't recognizing when a satellite contract has been abandoned and is not returning the VAB to an "unrestricted" mode...and unless there's a way to resolve it in the persistence file, I fear this career is totally unsalvagable. Persist File EDIT: Seems I was. For whatever reason, a .craft file had become corrupted which was resulting in the load craft dialogue refusing to open. Deleting the offending .craft fixed the problem.
  18. I must be really poor at rocket design. I seem to consistently run into the problem of my NTR transfer stages ending up having less dV than conventional chemical stages of similar mass; the mass from the reactor and all the paraphernalia associated with it end up doing bad things to the rocket equation. I understand that the initial un-upgraded tech is supposed to be crude precursors to mature nuclear space technology; however, I've yet to find an application for it which I did not end up better serving with a smaller, lighter rocket of more conventional design. Again, maybe I'm just bad at it.
  19. I understand the sort of storytelling element you're trying to go for, but in this case it feels so extreme as to be absurd. There's a difference between a good challenge and arbitrary obstruction. Especially if you're running FAR, truly, walking your Kerbal to the nearby biomes to scrounge up whatever science value you can seems to be the only viable option until you can at least get the liquid rockets. I spent the better part of an hour trying to build something, ANYTHING with the parts I had (which consisted of the capsule, the structural piece, and the SRB) that could actually transport the capsule somewhere intact, but it just got too frustrating. It seems as though I'd have been better served spending that time sending Jebediah on a pilgrimage to far away lands to collect Science than actually trying to build something. With FAR the flight characteristics are just too unforgiving to build anything survivable. The initial restrictions need to be softened somehow; concessions need to be made because of the fact Kerbal engineering doesn't work like in reality. A real space program would be able to glean Science from tests and experiments in the lab and come up with some set of core technologies before actually trying to fly anything. They can also learn from their mistakes and gather Science even from a flight that explodes into a fireball. But since we, the players, are limited to fueling our Kerbals' intellects with dirt and water samples, and can only gain Science from flights that -survive- (at least until we get comms tech), trying to get anything done early on with things as they are now just boils down to a painful, arbitrary grind. I hope I don't seem overly critical. The overall layout of this tree is the most attractive of any I've seen and I'd love to try it out further. Since you seem to understand the big issue I trust you'll iron out the kinks as you see fit.
  20. Dead while performing a test mission for an interplanetary cruiser. Was testing if its unproven parachute system offered landing capability. It did not.
  21. Very awesome. I always did like Apollo look-alikes, even if I was never very good at designing my own. I'm curious; why did you swap in the new inline micro engine for the LEM ascent stage as opposed to the LV-909? Is the engine such a large fraction of the mass that you get more dV out of a lighter, less efficient engine than the 909?
  22. Aagh, I must be challenged or something. I installed the Subassembly crafts into the new Subassembly Manager and upon load it tells me they're incompatible with this version of KSP.
  23. I really like the concept of this mod, but to be honest, I'm really having a lot of trouble using it. The one major thing I'd like to see changed is to still be able to select a dish target even when out of contact. I understand the realism rationale behind it, but from a gameplay standpoint it really doesn't work for me. In simply trying to get a single probe to Duna I've had to go through countless cycles of launches, quicksaves and quickloads because of "OOPS! You just targeted a relay that's out of range and can't connect you. You have now lost your spacecraft." It just becomes tedious and frustrating after a while. Maybe I'm just not doing it right.
  24. From my experience all Steam games end up in the Steam folder: Steam/Steamapps/Common So that's probably a good place to start looking.
  25. Should be able to click on the flagpole when in the Space Center screen and it will bring up a dialogue to choose a new national flag. Not sure if you can change mission-specific flags after launching, though.
  • Create New...