TheRag

Yeah, I had to abandon the game to, it's just too unstable for me.

Yeah, I checked over there, but they seem to just be running in circles over the issue, nothing other than discussion of the bug existence is being brought up. I would like to be able to play the game without becoming some sort of beta tester. And why isn't their away to revert back to 1.0.5 when the product is by all means broken for me, seems strange for not allowing it considering 1.1 was hyped beyond belief.

Basically, I want to see who has the infamous VAB/SPH crash that basically kills all playability for the game. And is it possible to downgrade to 1.0.5, because 1.1 is clearly not ready for actual playing and according to dev notes 1.1.3 won't come for a few weeks. Which basically means I have no way of playing the game. Every time a build a masterful design...KSP_x64 has stopped working. Mods or Stock, KSP has become a nice shiny car that I can't drive because the engine refuses to work. Oh and don't pester with the usual PC stats, because it does nothing to actually solve the problem. Yeah, sucks real bad.

Using HullcamVDS? It causes that because it's broken.

There shouldn't be equal ground. If you load an advance save and have bases and stations on Duna, then this competitor is a "new kid" on the block. If everyone starts on equal footing then it's not competiting, it's fixing. So agency are going to much farther than others. Think of it as NASA and SpaceX. NASA has been here for 60 years, and has landed on the Moon. Did SpaceX automatically get the rights and claims on landing on the Moon when it first started? No, it had to build up it's agency. Now they have achievements of landing boosters which NASA does not have. It's better to allow competitors to grow rather than giving them equal footing when you load your save. Frankly if you revert your flights then it's only you that is hurting your enjoyment, or can be counted as simulations.

Yep, crashes in the VAB constantly, don't know how this snuck through the pre-releases but it is terrible. All the output log seems to say that it crashes when it's deleting items. Perhaps it's something to do with the editor system.

You like the current science system? Me neither. What I am proposing is a new revamped way to do science. The current system rewards for quick hops and short stays on or in space. You land on X planet click a few buttons then leave never to return for science mission unless you didn't clear the planet. Frankly, NASA would shaking their heads at that system. Science doesn't magically disappear from a spot, and if it did, we'd be screwed. What I am proposing is this. Instead of instant-easy-bake science, have science over the long term, dripping in from the infinite source of the solar system. Very much like the MPL lab, but across the board with a changes and reorders. In this system people are encourage to return to planets without using some meta reasons. Here's how it works. Science instruments are "activated" they drain power but drip in constant science which is automatically deposited into the science bank, provided if they have an antenna giving unmanned missions and antennas much more relevance. A goo canister won't give 35 science on the Mun instantly, but it will constantly give a rate of science. A sun probe, would much more viable, as science instruments would drip in science rather than vacuum all the science in one orbit. These science rates will use the same multipliers from the current science system. Science is infinite as in the real world, we will never understand the mysteries of the mystery goo on Kerbin or on Jool. You could in theory clear the tech tree by just time warping a MG on the launchpad, albeit it would probably take hundreds of real life days to do it. The main idea of this system is that it encourages extended sessions on planetary bodies, getting rid of the whack a mole science spamming and the assumption that people love having constant income of science. It also encourages repetitiveness the core basis of proving anything. It would definetly help provide more reasons to build bases without having to download large ram hungry mods, however it can justify those ram hungry mods as the base has a scientific purpose beyond just a MPL lab. Any Thoughts?

This will be the end for stock KSP visuals as with know it. Proot does not only have KSPRC, but Scatterer as well, the New EVE, and Ven's stock revamp . Here will the hammer will strike the hardest. If KSPRC is finished, the last defense of Stock KSP visuals will be gone. (Except for windows users, but there are ways to curb it)

-71 5 jh

7 for ya chaps

Thanks guys I got to be compatible. Though female kerbals are a little wonky looking.

Title says it all. Since we have all been the situation when some battery powered gadget runs out of power, the first thing we do is put it on the charger. Of course we can't use the gadget until it receives minimum power, and then it takes sometime to for the gadget to power up. Another example would be a computer booting up, it is not instantenous. So what is the idea of this? When power goes to zero for a while or effective power is zero (Like when batteries are locked). When power is restored or when a batteries power is opened; how about a "boot up" time to let the spacecraft power up to full systems. Obviously there should differences between command modules, a Cubesat is going to have less of boot time than a large remote gudiance unit or even a space station. So I have devised a formula to solve this based on electric charge. Since it would be right to assume the more electrical charge a spacecraft carriers the more complex the systems are. Bt=E(.2)*4+M Where Bt= Boot time E=Electric Charge and M=mass. Mass can determine how long a computer system boots up, for example a home computer is a lot less massive then the Supercomputers that dot the world. 1/5 of Electrical capicty is to allow mass to play apart in boot time. Kerbals can lower the boot time by this formula. Bt=(E{.2}*4+M)/K Where K is the amount of Kerbals onboard. All in all this might a lot of fluff for such a simple concept that could be worked around easily. But nevertheless it could add another piece of the realism puzzle since spacecraft are known to "power down to standby mode." Oh boy Standby mode...yep I just going to leave it there.

Is the current version compatiable with 1.0.4? It is a big mod and I would like to know before I place in the Gamdata folder.

-21 twrispdv

-20 @PostiveNumbers

-22 _plst_

-20 2char

-65 You hit bump, go back one space.

-45 The gloves are coming off, Positive forces attack!

I recommend this instead, much more safer.

Don't know who gave this thread a one star, but good luck!

-19 The Restoration of Postive begins now!

Columbia was completely rebuilt, let me see if it was KJR not being installed correctly. EDIT: Yep KJR was inccorrectly installed, bug aborted, but RO/FAR users have to use KJR. Mike, there is something very special missing from the shuttle... ...the Sparklers! EDIT: The Orbiter's monoprop starts to boil off and is nearly empty by a day. The monoprop tanks should not allow that because they were highly pressurized.

-21 This insanity with negatives have gone on long enough

Fresh test results of the new version in RO/FAR, possible major bug, the shuttle has a tendency to rip itself apart on the launchpad. Will post on the bug tracker. I will use the Gantry to if this is relieved.