dave1904

Why do you compare it to ksp1? There are plenty of games that have good economies. Snowballing is an effect that happens and the solutions are limited. Contracts and parts in KSP are not balanced. That doesn't mean it cannot be done right. The solution to a broken system like we have in KSP1 is not to remove it. Most games have money because it works.

KSP2 is just not clicking for me. I see the potential but the UI and part window just turn me away so fast. I cannot stand the fact that there are no funds in the career mode. There is no challenge. You can add a billion planets and colonies but without an economy there is no depth whatsoever. For KSP2 a supply network would be awesome between colonies if you dont need to keep it running. Automatic supply lines would be a great addition then but what's the challenge in that of there is no funds to limit your craft choice. I need to supply a Duna colony from kerbin? Great. I need to build a rocket that can get 2tons to duna for the cheapest price possible. The player is then required to play the flight once manually to record it and then the game will automatically do it at every launch window. Life Support is hard-core but let's be honest. It would add so much to the game. A generic resource like Supplies would do it. More star systems will not add anything to the game. It doesn't matter what star the planet is orbiting. Same #### different day. With funds, supply missions and basic life support you can add the fundamental game features that mods can build upon and more importantly more depth.

People that want to surface attach things to balloon tanks will find a workaround anyway. The players that appreciate the level of detail and rocket design will refuse to abuse the "overpowered" tanks anyway.

The cheat menu. Alt F12. Click contracts-Active.

@Gargamel Im not sure if youre the guy to report this to but I see you in welcome aboard all the time so youre the only mod I see. Anyway. The download link on this topic leads to a scamming site. Can you delete it please Edit. Just realised there was a report topic button.

Why don't you make a separate tread here on the forums with every stage and it's history? I read some of the things here but it gets lost in 1200 pages of BDB.

Have I been building my Atlas-IIAS wrong? I mount 4 solids to the booster skirt. Did the real thing have some kind of tank reinforcement to support the extra twr? I'm always really uncertain how atlas-ii works anyway. It's stage 1.5 according to Wikipedia but the twr is horrible. Forcing me to launch with a high AP.

Visiting one of the surveyors.

Im just after realising how tiny atlas is compared to other manned orbital rockets.

Lol I was just reading about Mariner 9 and wondering if BDB has it. It does now haha

Jool, Euribanne and Palloocus have the same semiMajorAxis..... 68773560320 It throws an exception in the log because using the asteroid telescope. Just incase anyone has issues

Wrong post...

Not in this case because its a settings thing and not a bug or anything. It's a question about a single setting that causes major performance related stuttering. I've lowered it to 5 and everything seems fine. I just was wondering how people are getting away with settings above that or if they are ignoring the error.

To People changing the densityMultiplier to higher numbers than 5 for rescaled systems. Do you not get an error? I get log spams and severe stutter in the tracking station when first loading it. FPS goes from 2 to 60 again after a mintue or so. Performance in flight is good. First few seconds of loading can stutter but thats ok. Why would it affect performance in tracking station anyway? [ERR 19:30:55.112] Thread group count is above the maximum allowed limit. Maximum allowed thread group count is 65535

Build a shuttle carrier at last.