Gaarst

Yay!

@DoctorDavinci Changed it. @djungelorm Thanks for spotting the typo, correcting it right now.

No it's not cheating: do what you want in your own game. You don't have to use it either, I've been launching my rockets manually for 5 years and I'm fine. Now get to cover before people start fighting on this thread.

If you still have access to your KSP Store account, you can view the date there, in "My Account" (Store > Login > My Account).

They are quad-reactor double deck airliners. That's pretty much all they have in common. All airliners look more or less the same from the outside, but they are very different when you take a look at their manufacturing or characteristics.

Edit: they literally link the forum announcement as their source...

I did.

Theory does not mean hypothesis, scientifically. A theory is pretty much a fact.

Aliens don't exist until proven otherwise. That's how science works. Edit: I personally think it is possible they exist, but opinion != fact

You can only see your own. Mods give you one or several when you break the rules. Have enough and you'll get banned or some things like that.

"Oh hey, look at this really cool feature that we're going to spend ages developing and tweaking so that it's perfect! BTW you can't use it, how's that?"

BIG BIG UPDATE !!! @CarnageINC casually showed up with over 300 new mods that were just added to the main list! There are a lot of new mods and, as he suggested, I submitted the update before reviewing it completely so that you'd have it earlier. I'll be reviewing the entire list to search for any errors or things, but there might be a few that we didn't spot yet. If you see some, report them so that we are aware and they will be fixed soon!

How about making [random planet name], an interesting object? [random planet name] is an only body that can be explored,orbited and visited in stock KSP. Though we can't explore it so much. There is a lot of missions that are aimed to study and watch [random planet name] in real life. Why can't we have different periods or zones of [random planet name] that can be explored,so we could get some science points? Perhaps we can have a moments in Kerbal year when [random planet name] is very active/not very active for it to affect the work of the relay. For example: once a year at a certain time a powerful magnetosphere storm strikes, relay stops working and many probes lose connection. Ain't that would be cool, at least exciting? Fixed it for you. All planets are boring in KSP, not only the Sun.

This isnt important they should work on other stuff. Moving along.

We already have backups so that's not a problem. It's a good suggestion, however I'd like to wait a bit before doing this. Right now we are still "building" the list: most of what we do is add new mods and move them all around the place, I fear that with a public list this would become a big mess really quickly. It would be a good thing to wait for the list to reach a "finite" state where we will only add individual additions rather than buckets of 90 mods at a time. On the other hand, when 1.3 will pop out, checking all the mods for updates will be a lot of work, so it is possible that we'll make the list public then. We'll definitely think about it. Thanks! Adding it right now!

Added CarnageINC's first additions with over 90 new mods!

KSP is built on a "realistic" basis. Since 100% realism isn't fun for everyone, the game gets away from this realism by doing simplifications. Patched conics, infinite reliability and so on are fine because they are simplifications of real life made to make the game easier. Magic pilots are not a simplification of anything, that's where it differs from the previous examples and why I am against it: it's just an arbitrary feature for "balance"* and to make pilots useful. It doesn't help gameplay, doesn't bring anything new and doesn't make anything more accessible. It's unnecessary and against the game's principle of having realistic physics (save a few simplifications). * Though I don't personally see why balance is that much of a priority: astronauts are a burden, there's a reason why we've sent probes to Pluto while no one has stepped on the Moon for 50 years.

There are some pipes coming out of it. It may be something to do with the Verniers' hydraulics. Though the guy does not appear to work on the cylinder itself, but rather on some sort of servicing panel behind.

Most real life rocket separate the last stage in GTO and the probe itself does the GEO insertion. Most probes actually have integrated propulsion systems for altitude control or manoeuvring, and upper stages can't always restart when you want or aren't designed to keep functioning for several months, so they ditch upper stages when they did their jobs and rely on their own systems. In KSP separating the last stage is only useful if you have engines on your probe, otherwise you can just leave it there and save the cost of a decoupler. if your probe is just going to float there and won't move around, it's just a matter of looks: a satellite usually looks better on its own than with a big upper stage attached to it, but it's not necessary and doesn't bring any actual benefit.

I personally find that increasing the load per gear may help in this case. Increasing both spring and damper might also help. (I assume the LY-10 is the small retractable gear) Though this one is not the one I have most problem with, it usually behaves fine. The "wheel-on-a-stick" one gives me the most trouble. Wheels are kind of wonky, so there's no definite solution to this. Make sure that the gear have plenty of clearance (much more than the physical size of the gear) because that is known to cause issues, but other than that I don't really know what else to do.

You realise this would amount to shutting down half of Reddit if all games did that? As long as said forums don't offer pirated copies of the game in their front pages, I don't see a reason to prevent free advertising. Also, there's the whole thing about freedom of speech, free Internet and all that.

Just committed @CarnageINC's changes: mods are now ordered alphabetically within categories, categories order has been changed for more intuitive browsing, and a few descriptions have been edited/corrected.

There's not atmosphere on the Moon, I don't see a reason for its orbit to decay.

China's CZ-2F, India's GSLV MkIII and US' Titan II disagree. I'd rather launch on a hypergolic powered rocket than on the Space Shuttle, in terms of risks.

Physics are non-deterministic in general, QM being then most obvious example with randomness included in its very definition. Also, you couldn't simulate the Universe since that would require a computing machine greater than the Universe itself because you can't encode more information in an element than its own definition. At best you can consider that the Universe simulates itself in real-time, but you can't predict the future.