swjr-swis

No problem, life moves on. However, if you were to upload the Sketchup/Photoshop/Crazybump source files, someone else might be interested in continuing development...

And a post-it that says 'more snacks when you make it to orbit'...

TL;DR: Career, for the main reason that it takes but a few clicks to turn it into science/sandbox, without the arbitrary restrictions of either of them. When I have a KSP game running, I like having ALL the game options and space center facilities available to me, and you can only get that in a career game, whereas the other modes require you to stop and reload a different game from the main menu if you want to use/access/check the stuff they forcibly disable. Whenever I've had a sandbox game on, inevitably I read something in the forum or I want to do a quick check of something and I get the 'Keep your sandy shoes out of R&D' or 'No contracts for you, you filthy casual' messages. Ironically, that makes me feel like it's not a sandbox at all... it's imposing restrictions I did not ask for and do not want. While with career, it literally takes just a few clicks in the debug menu to turn a running career game into a 'SandBox++': unlock all R&D, facilities and progression, add a generous amount of funds if needed, and you have all the freedom of sandbox with none of the restrictions, you can still generate and run contracts if and when you feel like, and R&D is open. Sandbox does have benefits sometimes: it's simpler to set up for quick tests and challenges, or for testing performance-killing huge contraptions, so I do still sometimes use it for random stuff. But career mode is for all my 'actual' play and persistent universes, and for what I feel is the 'real' sandbox mode - freedom to do *anything* and everything in the game, whenever I feel like it.

Hola @markraken, bienvenido al foro. Una de las naves que tienes en tu carpeta VAB se ha guardado con algún fallo. Para dejar ver la lista de las naves, el juego las abre todas para leer ciertos detalles... pero con solo una que tenga un fallo se para el asunto. Lo que tienes que hacer es identificar la nave que causa el problema, y quitarla de la carpeta. Empieza por las naves que has guardado más recientemente - probablemente la última es la que causa el problema.

Well, the Junos are relatively recent additions to the game, so it can't have been a very old video. And the Junos have never been radially attachable. But it's possible the video author had mods installed that allow radial attachment (I think Editor Extensions has an option like that). Or... that person might've added a small part in front of the engine that wasn't showing well in the video, like a cubic octagonal strut, or a small nose cone... those parts can be attached radially.

Can you explain where you are trying to add that engine (I just now spotted the floating Juno)? 'Click onto' how? A little more information would help to understand what you are trying to do. The angle of the screenshot makes it a bit difficult to see, but it looks like you have left yourself no free stack nodes (the green balls that show where to 'click' stuff). Most jet engines, in fact I think all of the stock ones (except the gigantic Goliath), require a stack node to attach to, they cannot be attached freely (called 'radially' in the game). What you will need to do is select a part that can attach radially to either the wings or the fuselage and that will leave an open stack node at its back for an engine. Example: the Mk0 Liquid Fuel Tank can be attached (in mirror symmetry would be good) under the wings or to the sides of the tail connector, and will then have an open stack node on the front and on the back - the front one can take a small air intake, the back one can take a Juno jet engine. Mk0 is a good choice for this size of plane, and with two of them you should have plenty of power.

I've seen no immediate errors testing two of my 1.2.2 savegames (sandbox and a career) into 1.3.0... but that was short testing only. I always start new games with new versions.

@sarbian FYI: your file host (ksp.sarbian.com) has somehow ended up flagged as a 'harmful site', which is causing some anti-virus/browser software to block access to the download links in your OP here. The problem is not easy to figure out because browsers unfortunately will just show a generic issue with SSL or security certificate. Discovered this on a PC for which I was asked to install an older version of MM. Firefox, Internet Explorer, and the F-Secure AV on that system all gave different errors, but from the AV log I finally dug up it indicated the website was seen as 'harmful'. Unfortunately in trying to extract that log I managed to delete the entry, so I have no file to send you (zero previous experience with this F-Secure product, sorry). I went and reported the URL of your site to F-Secure as a false positive anyway, cause it was pretty easy to find (right at the bottom of the main page), but I couldn't quickly find how to do the same for MS or Mozilla and I needed to move on. You may want to check on this, else you may see people start complaining that your download site 'doesn't work'...

A question: what is the function of the plugin? I am wondering because there is no plugin required to make this work... all you need is to add the strings in the same format as the GameData/Squad/Localization/dictionary.cfg with the correct language code (eg. nl-nl), and change the language string in buildID.txt/buildID64.txt. The game will automatically use the strings of that language code at the next restart. Tip for everyone helping with this: that is also how you can test your work, even if it is incomplete, without having to wait for game or plugin updates. I see there is quite a bit of progress already in several of the languages. Good work, from everyone.

I'll add one thing to this comment: my main reason for using the 'pre-tilt' is repeatability. It is much easier to reproduce a near-perfect trajectory when you minimize the one thing that causes most of the deviations - user input. I would even say that especially when your craft has a lot of control authority, it can benefit from limiting how much the user decides the final trajectory. A pre-tilted rocket's launch profile usually looks like this: Set SAS stability and throttle to full Stage to launch Switch SAS to follow prograde at the prescribed speed (*) Stage when needed, but literally let the rocket fly itself for the rest of the way to apoapsis At most, all you need is to create the circularization maneuver node and perform it (*): Finding the prescribed speed to switch SAS is practically the only variable in this profile, it can be found pretty easily by doing a few test launches, and you quickly get a 'feel' for it. In my experience, flying the turn manually tends to result in a good bit more deviation due to inevitable pilot error (which I admit could be entirely me, it may be different for others).

While I appreciate you considering the suggestion, it appears everyone else is content with having it just drop cargo and return to orbit empty. That should be possible without changing anything to the engines, which would take less of your time and most people would have something they are happy with. 'My' use cases can wait for a next iteration, whenever, or I may even be able to use the fin solution. Go for the low-hanging fruit! (If you are are still considering it anyway: keep in mind that in @Space Kadet's solution the CoL moves an extra bit backwards because of the added control surfaces. It may still be necessary to add that extra offset to the CoL for stability even if the control authority comes from gimbal.)

That's the best I've seen it fly yet, even through max-Q. Nice work. Have you tried that configuration with some payload underneath? I seem to be the only one looking for that use case, so no biggie if you haven't, but I'm curious.

I'll admit I would prefer it showing all the time myself, but I wouldn't quite say it isn't useful: it at least shows the selected mode when it is most pertinent - when you are actually using the related gizmo.

Un par de cosas: Creo que esa opción ya hace tiempo atrás que dejó de hacer algo en concreto, pero no estoy seguro ya que hace varias versiones que no uso mods. La razón por la que probablemente no hace nada es que casi no se necesita: hay que hacer bastante esfuerzo para que el calentamiento en ascenso realmente cause problemas. ¿De veras llegan piezas a calentarse hasta el punto de explotar, o lo que te preocupa es solamente los efectos visuales? KSP exagera bastante los efectos aerodinámicos: la nave puede llegar a parecer una bola de fuego y sin embargo alcanzar órbita sin daño alguno. Lo del derroche: un par de versiones atrás, cuando la atmósfera kerbiana era bastante más densa, era mucho más fácil toparse con los límites de calentamiento y de resistencia en el ascenso, y varias de las opciones que todavía tiene MJ reflejan ese pasado. Pero eso cambió: tal y como es hoy en Kerbin 'stock', casi siempre es más económico ascender a toda fuerza, porque lo que más derrocha, por mucho, son las perdidas a la gravedad. Si aún así buscas maneras de obligar a MJ de ralentizar el ascenso, creo que la opción que mejor efecto tenía es la que prescribe un límite de presión... ahora mismo no me acuerdo del nombre en inglés. Necesitarás experimentar un poco con los valores.

It doesn't show constantly; you have to have a part held or selected for the button to show, and the button's function changes with the gizmo you have selected.

After all these years, I guess we're finally about to find out who the lunch thief is...

Hola IlCapo. Los mapas delta-V por lo general siempre se leen sumando todos los valores entre un punto y otro, y son solo en esa dirección. Un 'punto' puede ser la superficie, pero igual puede ser también desde órbita baja o al borde de la esfera de influencia... depende desde donde necesite viajar tu nave. En el caso que describes de Kerbin->Minmus: Kerbin superficie a órbita baja: 3400 Kerbin órbita baja a interceptar con Minmus: 930 (mas un máximo de 340 para adaptar la inclinación a la de Minmus, que se puede evitar si lanzas directamente en la inclinación necesaria y al momento correcto) Minmus desde punto de intercepción a órbita baja: 160 Minmus órbita baja a superficie: 180 Total de dV para un viaje en una dirección desde la superficie de Kerbin hasta alunizar en Minmus: 4670-5010, dependiendo de cuanto necesites corregir la inclinación. Para el viaje de vuelta, necesitas hacer la suma de nuevo en la otra dirección. Normalmente eso será la misma cantidad, ya que se suman los mismos valores en orden contrario: Minmus superficie a órbita baja: 180 Minmus órbita baja a punto de 'intercepción' de Kerbin (en otras palabras, escapar de la EdI de Minmus): 160 Kerbin punto de intercepción a órbita baja: 930 (mas nuevamente un máximo de 340 para adaptar la inclinación si quieres volver a la equatorial) Y volver a la superficie, teoréticamente: 3400 O sea, nuevamente de 4670-5010m/s, excepto que en este caso puedes hacer uso de frenado atmosférico para dismimuir la cantidad total de dV que necesitas. No, el mapa dice 3400 para subir de la superficie a órbita baja de Kerbin. Desde ahí necesitas 930(+340)+160+180 para posarte en Minmus. Para regresar, la suma en dirección contraria, que como dicho puede acortarse en parte con el frenado atmosférico. La cantidades de dV representa los cambios de velocidad necesarios para cambiar de estado - sin 'meterle' dV, la gravedad del planeta simplemente te mantendría indefinidamente en la misma órbita. O sea, que todavía los necesitas, y lo único que permite ahorrar algo de dV es que podemos usar la atmósfera para parte del frenado. 13850 No, es en una dirección. La cantidad necesaria para el viaje de vuelta sería de 8000+1330+80+90(+430)+950+3400 = entre 13850-14280, de lo cual puede eliminarse una parte significativa de los últimos dos 'pasos' usando frenado atmosférico en Kerbin.

The saves are compatible across languages, but keep in mind that certain things may be saved in the language you had at the time - for instance, the language of the subjects/descriptions of contracts or science experiments that make it into your savefile are decided at the moment the contract is generated or the experiment is done, and then persists in your savefile. So it is possible to have stuff in different languages in the same savefile if you switch a few times.

Indeed. Sometimes.

A tiny lil more than just a retouched still. Camera angle is completely different, shadows and reflections are not the same. They went to quite a bit of trouble to recreate that specific moment for the 'still'. And we don't even know what a fist-bump means for kerbals. Ahh well, I'm sure they were just uhm... aligning planets.

You may not have meant this, but I consider this here a possible easter egg about Valentina....

I see a lot of boosters very densely packed together, and other than the struts at the top it's unclear how you keep them from flexing and bumping into each other and the center stage. Note that the quad adapter at the top alone is not enough to keep four kickbacks from flexing and hitting each other... you have to strut at the bottom too (or use auto-struts, under the advanced tweakables) to keep all that thrust in line.

That Unity version indicates you're using an old version of KSP, one of the 1.1.x branch. We've had the 1.2.x versions for the past year already, and today saw the release of 1.3.0. It could well be a problem that has been resolved by now,so I would suggest you try one of those. Side benefit: both 1.2 and 1.3 have seen performance increases over 1.1, which means they run better on low-end hardware.

First, welcome to the KSP forums, _bf. What you describe is not normal, it should not happen. It's very hard to say what is going on in your game though, because you're giving us very little to go on. Can you create a screenshot of the craft on the launchpad at least? By default on PC, F1 will create a screenshot, and you can upload it to a service like imgur and link it in your reply in the forum. You might also consider uploading the savefile so we can test what is happening: load unto the launchpad as normal, then with Alt-F5 give the savefile some specific name, and upload it somewhere (dropbox?).

The random generation of applicants in the Astronaut Complex can be an issue for early careers, especially for less experienced players: first, because statistically it generates all roles equally, even though in early career and accounting for mishaps, pilots are needed way more than the others; second, because of the RNG nature sometimes it falls well below the average and you get an abundance of other roles and almost no pilots. The game gives us a way to resolve a deadlock though: we can generate Kerbals with specific roles in the Debug Menu (Alt-F12 by default on PC, under 'Kerbals/Create'). Consider it a form of aggressive headhunting, where you don't wait until applicants come to you, you go and snatch them up from a rival space agency. They will be added to your 'active' roster, so it is cheating in the sense that you don't have to pay for them, but you can compensate for that by removing the appropriate amount of funds through the Cheat buttons.