MR L A

ALL HAIL THE MIGHTY KRAKEN!

I have ONE ship that I can launch straightaway and it is only intended for LKO/MKO space station crew transfers, everything else, yeah tweaks to TWR, tweaks to payload, tweaks to staging (I know that can be done on the fly, but I prefer to get it right from the start) TWEAKS TWEAKS TWEAKS.

exactly what I said only 10x more succinct. Really? I never use this engine, mostly because it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the other tanks (unmodded) but I usually find that I don't need it anyway. What circumstances do you use it in? Got any build pics floating around?

You can always just rotate and offset to make it inline... but yeah I agree, a proper inline version would be pretty darn cool. I don't find myself using it overly much, mostly because it isn't really that good... but I do have a mono-propellant lander design inspired by Raptor's designs Also, the part of this question about what I look for in an engine... that very much depends on circumstances. I'm not overly fussy about individual isp, thrust, mass or cost but how they all work together to find the optimal engine for that vehicle. For example, I have a rocket which uses a single Mainsail engine on the first stage - for lighter loads I *could* get away with slapping a vector on the underside, but that makes it ridiculously expensive. On the other hand, I have a shuttle with three vectors (very expensive) because it needs the trust and gimbal ability - cost becomes a non-issue as the craft is recovered completely

Latest version and I'll be rebuilding the craft and doing unmodded testing tomorrow I suspected this. However, I'm annoyed that the fuel cells are actually ignoring the tank they are directly attached to - I'll be doing more test tomorrow and will report back. Would be nice if squad made them obey the same laws as engines though.

Hi everyone. I play KSP with the crossfeed obeys (something) option enabled, It basically makes refuelling and fuel transfer a pain in the behind as fuel cannot be transferred through certain parts. Which I like. However, I currently have a small capsule design which features a fuel tank (oscar b) exclusively for fuel cells. Two fuel cells are directly attached to the tank and this fuel tank cannot transfer fuel to the main tanks which supply the engine. Annoyingly, the fuel cells, DESPITE CROSSFEED BEING OFF, are somehow able to drain the main tanks and do so BEFORE emptying the tank they are actually attached to. As far as I can tell (though I will test this further) they also ignore the order in which tanks should be consumed. Whats up with this? Can anybody else replicate this behaviour of fuel cells doing whatever they please? Thanks!

I wasn't asking about smart parts. I was asking about OPs question relating to remote triggering of action groups.

What for? Kind of makes sense if you're in physics range but in that case switching vessels with the '[' or ']' key is probably going to be just at fast and less annoying when action groups end up out of sync. Out of physics range... honestly cannot think of a scenario where this would be useful.

Well that isn't Moho's fault... that's just long burns and hot parts that can happen absolutely anywhere in the system. The challenge of Moho is just a very small SOI, high inclination and distance.

Not really... I've only ever sent probes without radiators to Moho. The challenge is getting there because of its very high dV cost and is incredibly difficult to return from for the same reason. So, basically Moho is a challenge because it has a small SOI and high dV requirements to get there... pretty much identical to a potato in orbit of Jool. Not that I'm against the idea - your reasoning just seems a bit off.

I disagree tbh. How it looks now is a mess and tagging alone doesn't fix that. The ideal solution would be both tags and subfolders but seeing as how Microsoft can't properly handle tagging/file search in windows, I have little hope that SQUAD can. Subfolders would be easier to implement imo, neater and less hassle to use (in terms of remembering exactly how you spelt your custom tag).

How long before someone brings this back to features implemented by mods? wait.. I'll be that guy. My pet peeves are that mods like KER, KAC, Chatterer and RealPlume are mods... honestly think the should be stock. KER because it provides a lot of information a successful mission needs. KAC because I have no idea how anyone can do multiple missions without it. Chatter because KSP is ridiculously quiet without it and RealPlume because once you've used those engine fx you NEVER want to go back. True pet peeves though other than loading time... honestly idk. All the bugs are usually entertaining to some degree... apart from landing on moons where your craft just randomly starts wobbling about after landing and falls over.. that really grinds my gears after the 26th time. Edit: No I've got it! Craft save file system... can't create branches or subfolders withing sph/vab sections... hate having a list of all files rather than being able to have families of rockets grouped together. e.g. 1.25m family subfolder that contains all the 1.25m designs rather than alphabetical order Please fix this SQUAD.. I'd literally pay for this feature as its own DLC because I want it so bad.

This should probably be moved seeing as it isn't KSP specific... No where in the article does it say that CURRENT games will be retrofitted with micro-transaction content. The article only suggests that all new games T2 will have micro-transactions... nothing else

The mission was supposed to be rescuing a Kerbal on an elliptical orbit around Kerbin... by the time I launched they'd been kicked out of the Kerbin SOI by the Mun. I'd only unlocked 1.25m parts at this time so a solar rescue wasn't going to be easy.

Doesn't sound like a particularly efficient ascent at all. Best ascents keep AP constantly about 45 seconds away and going through the atmosphere for that amount of time, even if it is thin at that stage, is costly. Here's a great thread on the topic - Wrong. The average gaming PC (average also placing it as midrange) still has 8gb. http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Well that's nice for reducing part count but is that it? lol

I can use a keyboard properly you condescending oaf. I'm perfectly aware that to play KSP we don't need analogue input and nor did I say anywhere that I or anybody else did. I'm saying analogue control for flight is better. There's a reason people with an interest in flight use analogue controls and it isn't because then need to "learn how to properly use a keyboard".

I'm slighty confused about the Mk1-3... it sure looks very nice but is it actually any better that the 1-2? I wouldn't miss the 1-2 if this replaced it in the game but with the sequential name it makes sense that its an upgrade.. but what will be the "upgrade" part? It has the same number of Kerbals right? Is it lighter? cheaper? Tell me why (other than aesthetics) would I really want to unlock it if I was playing career mode? Sorry if this has already been covered btw

That isn't what I mean by fine movement. A press of the key still has maximum effect in that given direction, caps lock just reduces what the 'maximum' is. Also, toggling caps repeatedly during flight is extremely... crap. It's not even a valid point when someone wants fine pitch control but full roll. Aside from that, I wasn't specifically applying this to KSP. You asked why anyone would "play PC with noobsticks" - I answered; because they aren't "noobsticks" depending on what you're actually playing or even trying to do within KSP. Also, if you think WASD works plenty well for atmospheric flight, I'm pretty sure you're not a flight sim guy lol

because analogue controllers are FAR superior for fine movements required in flying/driving games. WASD simply doesn't cut it (unless you buy that analogue keyboard that can tell how hard you press the keys). Yes, M+K is a lot better for FPS games and a "pro" wouldn't dream of playing CS:GO with a 360 controller, but by the same token, a professional driver/pilot wouldn't dream of playing a racing game/flight sim using WASD.

I have a 360 controller and adaptor for PC... do I need to do anything special to get it working with KSP? I'd quite like to have a go at flying with it

Ven's Stock Revamp is always nice if you want to try nicer looking stock parts PLUS have some gaps plugged with new ones. Also, make it a challenge for yourself and do unmanned before manned (mod) and other SETI mods Could try something like Galileo's planet pack if you want a harder game and new lands to explore (though you need a patch for SETI) Other than that, I assumed you already use KAC, KER and SCANSat?

Could just use a mod that reduces science income and stop science mining lol. For example I use a mod that reduces science and I do not allow the Science Jr component on manned lander missions

I can guarantee the response you will get to this is something along the lines of "we all have different ideas about what should and shouldn't be in the stock game - some people think a feature like this should be stock, some people think its completely unnecessary - and seeing as there are mods available to fill the gap, just use them" IMO some flight computer system would be cool... but I imagine it would be a hell of a learning curve on top of a game that already seems ridiculously hard until you know what you're doing. Do we really need a flight computer though? Sure, it would be cool to sit back and watch something land on another planet automatically or deploy antenna and solar panels at a specific orbital height but doesn't that mean you're just doing less work and watching the computer play for you?

This kinda makes me wish the flatter-bottom look was chosen for the MK3 parts as stock...