MacroNova

I use multiple nodes all the time to plan a long trip, but I find i have to recreate the second, third, etc nodes because they will be off slightly if I don't execute the first node with exact precision (which is never).

That was me, and I love the new title!

Pretty sure my first Mun landing involved using way too much fuel, coming in way too fast, but ultimately sticking the landing, just to derp out on the differing orientations between my reaction wheel controls versus the camera angle and nav ball behavior. Yup, I tipped over. These days I can reliably do precision landings within a decent margin for the survey contracts. Amazing how far a little practice will get you.

I used docking mode all the time in .90 and prior. I actually liked how space bar would switch between rotation and translation, and I could keep my hand on the mouse for camera rotation. No idea why they changed it.

Note To The Community! "note to the community posts" are condescending and arrogant. It implies you know better than others, instead of having a different opinion from others. Some people think having the most amount of realism possible is more fun and best for the game. I basically agree with the content of the OP though - you can say why you don't like a particular suggestion without totally poo-pooing it. Now if only there was a way to get that idea across in a title that didn't sound like it was coming from on high... ::cough:: "Rant about people who shoot down mod ideas on realism grounds" ::cough::

This transfer calculator shows how you can shave several weeks off the trip without much extra dV. http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/

@toxicfrog I've never tried it and would love a better explanation from someone smarter than I, but you could use KER to get the suicide burn info, and program it into the computer, plus a little extra padding, all while holding surface-retrograde. This is just to touch down without exploding. Good luck landing on all four legs and staying that way with the flight computer.

Ah, good point. I do that too but forgot to mention it.

I ran into this, so I've been putting my sepratrons near the top of the SRBs and angled about 60 degrees down from horizontal. No exploding issues.

True, it can get excessive. When that happens I typically let those expire while I do other things. I haven't really had to spam the decline button to scum for contracts I want to do. But I think a better balance of contracts would encourage the player to accept more of them and use the decline button less, which feels more "pure" in terms of gameplay. Love it! The Admin building is certainly lackluster right now, and while the current strategies don't need to go away completely, an addition like this would be pretty cool.

Has anyone ever damaged a KSC building jettisoning their SRBs at low altitude? I'm astonished every single time it doesn't happen.

It still makes sense to me that someone would offer the contract even if they don't expect to be the first Kerbal on Duna. From the tourist's perspective, it's an investment in a lofty future goal. A permanent surface station seems unnecessary, but the orbital station could be interesting, especially if it was required to dock with the station. Not sure what you mean with the replacement bit. I really like the idea to have tourist missions be a major source of reputation. They already offer reputation as a final payout, but having more variety in how contracts pay out and what types give which currency would be pretty cool.

Haha, wow. Reaction wheels are even more magical than I realized.

I'm getting lots of use out of SRBs on my 1.25 and 2.5m crafts, but I can easily see that ending when I graduate to 3.75m designs.

So there's no benefit to putting reaction wheels far from the center of mass to get increased torque?