qzgy

MMMMkay so..... the monster flies. Just about. Album here. Scoring More boom: - 264*12 = 3168 100 Convincing Arguments: +20 SPACE Bomber!: +20 (not shown, but has been tested to be possible) Top speed at 3km of about 700 m/s: +70 Maintenance - 32 Rapiers and 4 Goliaths --> -320 (No penalty for goliaths? Ok I guess) Also add the uhhh 740 parts: - 14.8 Did the math: +100 Fastest Heavy bomber (for now I think): +10 Gentle Giant (its anything but): +20 Service Ceiling (It's powered by rapiers. And rockets. Is it really necessary to prove?): +15 Such Stealth, very sneak: Its kinda flying wing-ish right? +2 Total score!: 3090.2 Points. That more boom thing is very OP. Especially in the heavy bomber range, there's like no point to actually try the other challenges (although it probably could). Still, the engineering itself is a fun challenge! Especially trying to drop bombs at many 100s of meters per second...... If goliaths are penalized by 2 points, then the final score should be 3082.2.

The question isn't how many bays you have, its how many bombs you hold. looks like it'll hold quite a bit though.

Cause I hate myself. And I thought more than 200 bombs on a space-capable bomber would be funny. still working on it. Might send a dropbox link though.

I guess I just have to beat both of you to keep you from fighting over the F Also - send help my PC doesn't like running 800 odd parts in the air.

@CatastrophicFailure .... moar?

On the subject of marching bands, my sister and her marching band set a new school record. (I'm not in a marching band - the schools a bit too small for one)

Not even for thanksgiving? And I thought my school break policy was a bit empty (no breaks from about start of school till thanksgiving IIRC, then nothing from then until winterbreak in mid december)

1 - Did that for my early space shuttle missions. My earliest designs were basically a jet/rocket powered plane which released the shuttle at a high enough apoapsis. 2 - As with above, I also used jet engines on the same launch vehicle. Specifically rapiers. actually I can show an image here. Both the jets and horizontal takeoff were fine. 3 - No restriction there. I also used symmetrical layouts around a main shuttle. Shuttle deisgn rules are in general pretty lax, so long as you ditch something and part of it comes back.

In my albeit limited experience, using an Saitek ST290 didn't give any noticeable input lag. I can see how more than a second of input lag would make it useless.

Ohhhhhhh ok. I see what you're saying Then you need to make something else to take it down

For myself personally its worked quite reasonably. Bit wonky as it starts to drift if you leave to controller plugged in for a long while, but well enough. Dont really use the joystick that often though, so I can't really say how well it does or doesn't work.

but I like my stock parts....... Heres a scifi-ish ship to start off with. High part count, but you could probably strip away the internals to make it lower in part count. https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/Grenadier

uuhhhhhhh Apatosaurus? IDK, brontosaurus seems like the most obvious thing.

Wingplacement is a personal thing, as long as it flies its fine. I would HIGHLY reccomend though using the wings with fuel in them. You get wings and free fuel space! Whats not to like?

Yeah probably should! OTOH, the bomber as is already weighs like.... almost 1000 tons or something? and carries well over 200 bombs. So uhhh..... overkill much? wait nah there's no such thing as overkill. Have to give props for nice bomb packing. ATM my design has issues with things exploding during deployment. Now in fairness, it is using a one time use bombrack that decouples and then auto annihilates, releasing its peaceful spawn to wreak havoc upon whatever target there is. Overcomplicated? yes. Effective? Maybe.

No probably not....... I could remove some fuel tanks to double the number......

WIP You know whats happening @Kernel Kraken

Still think howitzers, cannons, and mortars would have been funner Anyways, I heard about this neat trebuchet design. Might interest you. https://www.instructables.com/id/MURLIN-Trebuchet/ Its called a Murlin trebuchet. No idea why or what the efficiency is compared to a standard trebuchet, but uhh, yeah! Could be an interesting idea.

Hey uhh suggestion here - why not just do frame counting? On youtube you can advance frame by frame with the period (.) and comma (,) keys. In the clip posted, he goes from standstill to having the rockets at full speed in 1 frame. Given that the clip has 24 fps, thats about 0.0417 seconds. So your measurement (presumably done with a stopwatch) does actually come relatively close to the value posted. Warning - Contains kinda bad physics. Conclusion - He might be able to go really fast. That must be then a really fast roadrunner.

Ok fair enough scammy is a bit of a stretch. I do not suggest at all the latter, but to me it would be deceptive if you had to buy the game then pay some subscription fee to use the multiplayer feature in a reasonable way (though this isn't quite clear from the post....) Maybe @JedTech could clarify?

Sounds.... Fun! How far can you stretch catapult? Cause if catapult just means launcher, i would suggest building something like this or maybe some air pressurised canon. Or you know, giant slingshot.

Also means we can make more fireworks.

You do realize that other players have like things to do outside of KSP right? So saying "oh well it'll take a day" doesn't work for example if I happen to be a student who has to do studying for classes and what not. Also if I have an event on the weekend the same time as a maneuver, I'm not going to drop everything just to do a simple maneuver. I know you say "fix this with automated maneuvers", but what about multiyear missions to Jool for instance? I might launch something this year and it'll only show up there by the time my birthday has passed. Twice even. Timewarp exists primarily to get around this pesky problem of limited speed travel over huge distances. Breaking that kinda breaks some if not all of the fun of the game as what used to be an evening Laythe mission becomes a multiyear endeavor. If that happens no ones gonna go to Laythe, or Eeloo, or Dres, or pretty much anywhere farther than Kerbin SOI. Kinda defeats the whole point of having those other planets then doesn't it? Also holy crap that is by far one of the worst ideas I've seen here. So a player who can't afford to pay the subscription fee can't really do anything as they pretty much can't build anything of worth and if they do manage to cobble something together, they would basically be playing caveman style. Seems like a totally reasonable business plan - deter your small player base with a presumably regular subscription fee to actually do meaningful stuff in the game. Essentially you've made KSP pay-to-do-anything-fun. I know I wouldn't stand or be willing to pay for that. I wouldn't be surprised if not many others thought the same. TL;DR - Timewarp is an essential feature to make the game remotely fun, and adding a subscription fee is scammy IMO.

But uhhh..... some of the players did actually ask for a part look revamp. You know, to make it look more consistent and better. I will say the new parts are at least consistent, perhaps a bit bland I agree. As for your other suggestions as to what they should have done - Multiplayer has been beaten to death at this point and is currently without a good solution for the whole timewarp problem. Unless you can come up with a brilliant uncompromising way to do so, I think its gonna stay dead. - Better graphics in what sense? Visual packs exist that already provide this. And KSP isn't really played for graphics is it? In fairness too the current graphics aren't horrible. - Yeah I can agree with console updates. But as many people said, that was an outsourced thing, not something done internally by squad. - I can agree with more stuff to actually do. But what would you suggest for this? (this goes for new game mechanics too) - What'll happen is basically look shiny new planet! oh its boring again. Its not particularly novel at that point.....

Ok. I can see why you'd rather not. That is quite interesting. So what is the normal effect of the venom?