Tourist

1 make sure you have solar panels. 2 make sure you extent your solar panels the moment you are in orbit. 3 no, seriously, the moment you are in orbit extend those panels 4 .... Ok, well at least make sure you open them before you time acc.... Sigh. 5 press revert.

Sure, I get it, it was not perfect on release, unlike every other game that is released is perfect. The thing is, its done now... its over, we can't go back in time. There is no quickload in real life. There is literally no point in keeping this fire burning, except for people to feel smug. Its that, which I find irritating.

I wish (or more accurately, hope) the success of KSP inspires a glut in good space games, some of the created by Squad once they are done with development on KSP, and by others inspired by them. I wish people would build a bridge and get over the "Squad released too early" issue. I wish MechJeb was integrated into stoCRACK-BOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....sizzle...sizzle...

A few others have mentioned it, but do Duna, but do it with a realistic flavour. By that I mean, no three person capsule would be sufficient for a journey of that length in real life. Some of the Gemini astronauts got a bit tetchy on some of the longer missions. There was even a "mutiny" by Wally Schirra and team on Apollo 7 (kind of). So build a ship capable of getting a number of Kerbalnauts to Duna in relative comfort. At the very least I feel every Kerbal should have a compartment. Say at least one command pod, one hitchicker container and a science bay. That way they all have their own spaces. And can work in shifts, one sleeping, one sciencing, one monitoring the ship. That's how it works in my head cannon. You would also need an ascent/descent vehicle to Duna, and if your feeling ambitious, bring a small vehicle capable of exploring Ike while your there.

Wow! I bet you are good at tetris. I don't pack mine quite that full, but I often have a small tank of monoprop, batteries, maybe a bit of extra fuel, if the fuel budget is tight. I do use it for the solar panels though.... I know it doesn't really matter, but I just don't think it looks aerodynamic to have the OX-Stats on the outside of a plane travelling faster than the speed of sound... they should be torn at some stage of leaving or re-entering the atmosphere. I put them on the fuel tank, open up the bay doors once in space.

I personally don't think there is anything wrong with the contracts system. You do need to be efficient with you missions though. As many here have described by combining contracts. Also my personal favourite thing is to try to do everything I can reusable. For instance, satellite launches around Kerbin I try to do from spaceplanes, returning the probe once the mission is complete by parachute. However while I don't think there is anything "wrong" with the system, does not mean they could not be improved. For instance the "insane" contracts, probably could do with being dialled back just a little from insane, to challenging. I'd also like ambitious multi-stage contracts.... not sure if its possible for such a thing to be programmed and work reliably. To demonstrate what I mean, a "simple" multistage contract would be setting up a comms network, requiring multiple satellites at specified orbits/etc. The televised Mun landing mission, requiring comms satillites, survey mission, staged progress to landing (1 ship suborbital, 1 ship on a free return, 1 ship mun orbital, landing.) The rewards for these complex missions should be significant, recognising the effort required.

Same thing happened to me. In one instance I had four ships, heading to different destinations, Moho, Dres, Jool and Eve. Changed back to the Moho ship preparing for course adjustment, got the not a number error, reloaded and the ship was gone. This error replicated every time I quick reloaded. Happened in another instance where I had a ship going to Jool and Eve. The Jool ship to disappeared after the not a number error occurred. The only mod I use is Kerbal Alarm Clock. I'm not sure if this got around the problem, or I was just lucky, but I found it did not occur if I changed to the ship once it changed SOI at the destination... this of course means nailing your encounter at launch or soon after.... at the very least performing all adjustments before launching the second ship. Also save often.

All I can say is please try and succeed or fail, post pictures. There is no shame in trying to do the near impossible and failing.... although, perhaps bringing the Kerbals onboard down safely first, and automating everything else may be a prudent idea.

I didn't realise struts broke off when the stage they were attached to was jettisoned. I thought that if I had a strut connecting a two sections, it would drag the jettisoned stage with me. So I came up with a number of methods to detach them, such as connecting them directly to a decoupler, or in one case to a plate attached to a decoupler. As a result I thought struts were useless... I'll let that sit there for a minute... I ... thought... struts... were.... useless. Not sure how I discovered that my elaborate work-rounds were unnecessary. For bonus points, F5.... oh how revelatory to find this magical button.

I agree with everything you said, except the last bit. If it exists, but just as a part you can unlock and attach (I imagine it being like the batteries), players can choose not you use it. I can't see how that affects the "hands-on" pilot's enjoyment. I'm sure we all have parts we don't use. I for one have never used the Ion engine. Nor have I ever used the Round 8... and I know how much people swear by those. I've just never found a use for it. But I suppose, as you say, mech-jebbers can always mod it in. Its just I can see great potential for adding bonus depth career mode. For instance, Mech-jebs capabilities could be tied to certain experiments. Such as, it can't reach orbit automatically until you have done various barometer and accelerometer tests at various points of a manual ascent. If people want to use auto landing on celestial bodies, perhaps a probe with a beacon needs to be landed first to provide telemetry. Totally with you on letting people play they way they want, and no name calling though. As Abraham Lincoln once said "Be excellent to each other... and.... PARTY ON, DUDES!"

I haven't used it yet, but not only do I think its not cheating, but it should eventually be added to stock.... but way way up the tech tree. It should not be available straight away (except in sandbox of course). I think it would allay many players and Squads fears about it becoming too easy if you have to earn your way to Mechjeb. The best way I can think to do this is have it as a part near where the high science cost probe cores are, and needs a fully upgraded tracking station to for it to work. Also costs weight and doesn't work if not powered. My thought is that it should not be available until you have at least landed on both mun and minmus and one interplanetary transfer. After that you have passed your rocket launch and navigation tests. In this way, Mechjeb is not a first level tool for avoiding learning the necessary skills, rather becomes, as it should be, a tool for experienced players move onto more complex endeavours without needing to worry about those mundane parts of the process they have done a million times before.

I always build up to the early missions (Mun and Minmus)... so while I may have the tech to go straight to a Kerballed landing, I generally always send probe first, followed by a 1 kerballed fly by on a free return trajectory, a kerballed orbital mission, then eventually a landing.

I've never used Mechjeb (but may give it a try someday), but it's certainly not cheating. I'm not sure how one 'cheats' at what is essentially grown up lego. I suppose infinite fuel may considered to be a cheat, but even it has its uses in simulation and testing, and at the very least the only thing you'd be cheating is your own enjoyment, as a fair part of KSP's is as a fuel efficiency simulator. Also, its not as if NASA didn't automate... well... pretty much everything. The astronauts were pretty much cargo except for docking and lunar landing (with some notable exceptions of course).

Honestly, I think the best thing is to walk away from the computer games entirely from time to time (talking days or weeks, nothing more drastic). Don't get me wrong, I'm one of those people who rolls their eyes whenever anyone looks down on my hobby, over say, reading, going to the theatre, or playing sport. Its no better or worse than any other pastime. But seriously, sometimes its good to get away, go on bushwalks, go do something cultural you would never ordinarily do... like ballet, symphony, go watch some community level Rugby.... I imagine there would be a great community spirit in club Rugby in NZ.

Sounds good! Hoping to eventually have the time to try it out. After restarting when 1.0x released I haven't even had time to unlock resource scanning yet. So many more things to play with.... so little time to play with them.

I just can't see how multiplayer is even necessary for KSP.... its a game about building your own unique contraptions and sending them on missions that last years (in game) time. I mean, getting people to help collect science? That's like 50% of the game currently right there that you're essentially outsourcing to friends. Helping you build megaships? so you mean I'm handing over a large portion the ship designing to somebody else... no thanks. Boarding and stealing stuff? Isn't that just Elite... and I'm not even sure how you could even dock with a ship in space piloted by a real person who does not want to be boarded.... I'm not sure its possible to be honest. Even with the Claw, all you'd need to do is accelerate away and its unlikely anybody could catch you. I know this is just my personal opinion, but multiplayer should just not be a priority.

In real life I have never flown a spaceplane into orbit and docked with a space station. I have never re-entered the atmosphere in a spaceplane directly over an airport in a perfect position for a (somewhat bouncy) landing. These things and many others KSP allows me to do. Makes me feel like hotshot pilot, rocket scientist and mission control all in one.

As a starting point I'd say I'd rather focus on the positive, than a negative. Hate is a strong word, with only negative connotations. So with that stated, what I think could be improved is; More purpose for space stations. They are part the way there with the science bonus, but also perhaps ongoing bonuses to rep and budget by keeping engineers and pilots around. Maybe have the bonus diminish over time as the Kerbals get fatigued and need to be switched out (ie maintaine missions). Could be augmented by specific maintenance contracts. (this could also apply to bases). A big, expensive, and scientifically extensive "endgame" project which would required the collection of science, money and rep after the tech tree is completed. Almost like a Wonder in civilisation. Connected to the above two points, complex contracts. Such that multiple launch's, components needs to be sent, and conditions met. For instance, televise the Mun landing. Conditions, have TV satellites in orbit around Kerbin and Mun, test launch vehicles, land at specific place. Place flag. Return. etc.

One thing you could do is make it so that pilots buff reputation. So if you craft contains a pilot, a multiplier is applied to reputation gains. In my head cannon it works like this. Engineers fix things... obviously. Scientist increase the amount of science you get, because of their keen scientific observations in situ. Pilots are the charismatic, heroic, mission commanders, who do live TV broadcasts to school kids back on Kerbals, are interviewed by Walter Kermankite and appear before committees. Of course then you have to make reputation more meaningful late game, but still...

Is it possible that it may even travel along a major public road to these areas of particular peril?

In my humble opinion (based on minimal testing) the balance seems right. Squad had a difficult task, without reliable metrics by which to judge how people were enjoying the previous changes, it can really only follow its instincts. Forum posts are not a reliable metric... it only tells you what those who are the most engaged with the online community think, but that is only a fraction of the total number of players of KSP... and even if it did represent the general will of the player base, there was no way you could say that there was a consensus on the forums about previous aero changes. Time will tell, but I think Squad has it right this time. Also the fun vs realism debate was always a bit ridiculous... after all the "realism" supporters only support it because its fun, presumably. Also "realism" was also bit undefined. KSP is "realistic" in the sense that it simulates, albeit in a simplified way, space navigation, and rocket science. reaching orbit, orbital mechanics, transferring SOIs, etc. Instead of unrealistic space navigation like Wing Commander (and its latter equivalents), Star Wars (ie spaceships handling like planes) etc. But maybe not realistic in terms of the size of the bodies and the effect this has on how atmosphere should, but doesn't in KSP, work. Anyway, ramble end.

My first asteroid redirect mission was a bit of a comedy of errors. A lot of the usual, overcooking the launch so it flipped, less than optimal launches leaving too much plane alignment to do. Anyway, first error that is on topic. Asteroid was coming over the top of Kerbin, roughly NE to SW. Took off, almost perfect alignment with the plane of the asteroid. Good high orbit, heading roughly SW to NE.... in the opposite direction from the asteroid. OK new launch, got an alignment requiring very little adjustment. Asteroid is still some time away from its PE. Go to the tracking station to accelerate time till the correct moment. Ship won't obey my commands.... why, I wonder. The claw won't open, the throttle won't throttle... then I realise. Ultimate rookie mistake. I'd forgotten to extend the solar panels before time accelerating hadn't I?

Personally, I feel multiplayer is a very low priority... I'd prefer a good old Kraken hunt, another look at the contracts system, and addition to stock of some of the great mods, in particular KAS.

I know what you mean, once you've completed the tech tree, collecting science becomes completely unnecessary. On my last playthrough, I completed the tech tree before leaving Kerbins SOI! This meant I really had no need to send any science-y type equipment to on any of my trips to other planets... great for my weight and fuel needs of course, but not great for maintaining the challenge. As a consequence my suggestion would be some kind of tech tree endstate.... , very much inspired by Scott Manley's Interstellar Quest series, have some kind of future tech that you need a lot of science to unlock, like a "warp drive". Essentially buying the tech just gets you a game over screen (although you can continue with the game). Maybe couple this with a building project the new tech would need to be built into.... ie have a ship with warp drive, room for X number of kerbals, power etc.

There is a podcast called 'space rocket history' on iTunes. Discusses that very question in extreme detail.... And I mean extreme detail.