Tyko

Please close this

My map often displays orbit lines for contracts - some of them are only offered contracts that I haven't even accepted. How do I hide these orbits - especially for the available contracts? They're just adding noise to my map view.

I even loaded a save prior to the launch and re-launched with the same problem. Tried quitting and restarting several time - probably tried a half dozen ways to reload/restart and still had it

In the new 1500 build I'm having a heck of a time with maneuver nodes. Several times I've placed a maneuver node to build an intercept with the Mun (which i've done 100's of times). I'll prograde out to around 860-875DV and move the node back and forth along my orbit and it just won't show an intercept - the projected orbit passes right through the area I'd expect to intercept the Mun and the plot looks like the Mun and it's SOI don't even exist. Are others seeing this too?

Every time I launch KSP prerelease from Steam it pops up a box with two options Play Kerbal Space Program Launch KSP (64-bit) The first option is the default and it also sounds a lot friendlier - the second option reads as rather technical, like something only technical people would select. This could result in newer players choosing the non-64 bit option

EDIT - It's because Module Manager isn't updated... I noticed that even simple .cfg changes don't work. For example. @Alshain wrote up the .cfg script below that reduced the weight of Mk1-2 command pods and Mk2 lander cans. Even this doesn't seem to be working. // Change the mass of the Mk1-2 and Mk2 Lander for better balance // Author: Alshain @PART[Mark1-2Pod]:FINAL { @mass = 2.4 } @PART[mk2LanderCabin]:FINAL { @mass = 1.4 }

suggestion: rescale the Communotron 16-S to 75% it's current size. The default size is too long to fit on the side of a Mk1 capsule. Since this seems like a very normal way to use this antenna it would be nice if the antenna didn't extend past to heat shield and/or extend into the parachute at the top.

@cybutek Thank you so much for the work. I just sent you 10 pounds via paypal to keep you caffeinated through the 1.2 release Side note: KER stage view is showing inaccurate thrust metrics for some engines. the Reliant engine shows 325kN in stage view (vs 275 shown in info box). Swivel is showing 230kN (vs 200). My test platform is a Mk1 capsule, a single fuel tank and the engine - simple as possible.

The game currently doesn't include part failure. Unless they implemented part failure across the board I don't it makes any sense to single out nuclear reactors. Especially since historically nuclear reactors have been pretty safe and Kerbals seem to embrace nuclear power more than humans - more use = more experience = more reliability As a side note, I don't think part failure should be part of the base game anyway.

I'm really liking the new PorkJet engines...if the cowlings in the Boat-tail versions are reducing drag I'm thinking it would also make sense for them to be a bit heavier. Not sure if this is already in the works, but it's worth considering.

Porkjet's new MK1 pod is great, but the bottom is so rounded and elongated that it extends through and past the 1.5M heat shield...Not sure the heat shield will provide any protection.

I saw in the advanced game settings (when setting up a new save) that you can select for Kerbals to get experience immediately instead of waiting until Recovery

KerbalSpaceProgram.com go to Store Log in My Account Click on the Download button next to your purchased copy of KSP Scroll Down to near the bottom and the Downloads list You'll see the PreRelease options at the bottom

it's at the bottom of the same page where you'd download a current version...go to the store, log in, go to download KSP and scroll down

Is there an easy way to install Porkjets new models? I didn't see a readme or anything in the ZIP folder. EDIT - you drop the entire unzipped folder into GameData Also, where do I find the pre-release on the KSP store? EDIT - This is on the Store Page near the bottom Thanks!

hmmm..I guess I'll reserve my final opinion for when I try it. It sure feels like a miss though. You're going to be zooming in/out or scrolling a lot in such a small viewer.

I haven't been able to figure out if that map window is expandable. Would be a waste to view only through a postage stamp sized viewer when I have a 27" monitor. Can anyone confirm if it's resizable?

Yep, but 1.2 is feature locked now which means your suggestion won't make it into the current build. I was simply providing some information to help you out in case you actually wanted to get a solution in the near term.

Building on what @78stonewobble said...and tying in another thread about many players never going further than Minmus. A system that includes a limited amount of LS by default in all capsules - say enough for a quick trip to Minmus and back - but requires more planning for extended lunar stays or longer missions would kind of fit the bill for me. Players who are just exploring the area around Kerbin would be covered, but once someone was experienced enough to want bigger challenges they'd find the need for life support layered on. This keeps the learning curve for new players from getting steeper and offers a way for the challenge to grow. Currently it's not really much more complicated to get to Duna or Laythe than it is to get to Minmus. You need more time and more DeltaV, but the essential challenges are the same. This would change that @RoverDude kind of tackles this in USI LS already. With a bit of tweaking I think it would work really well.

Portrait Stats mod by DMagic helps with this. When you hover over a portrait,the section of the ship that the kerbal resides in is highlighted.

I think the big reason rovers aren't more useful right now is because the game was built around making manned (kerballed) spaceflight simple. Kerbals don't add any weight to a ship, their consumables don't weigh anything and they can sit happily in a single seat capsule for years. Because it's relatively easy to send kerbals, there are less incentives to send rovers. I'm not saying it should be changed, but, if life support and crew comfort were concerns we had to deal with I think that rovers would be a more viable alternative for many missions - just like they are in real life.

You can edit the mod itself so it leaves the stock cupola instead...I'll see if I can track down how I did that. Here's the line you have to get rid of to remove the cupola https://github.com/VenVen/Stock-Revamp/blob/master/GameData/VenStockRevamp/PathPatches/Command-PathPatches.cfg#L9

Wow, thanks for much for taking the time to break all of that out for me...Also for the tip on evaluating mods after I install them. I seem to have solved the problem with the NaN errors. that was likely because I had some solar panels from Vens Stock Revamp and then removed the mod because I was streamlining. A number of other errors seem to be related to mods I'd tried out and then removed - like the Universal Storage line - I'm not even using that mod. It must have left something in the game after I removed the mod. I'll have to do some housecleaning. Thanks again

Thanks for confirming. I'm actually on my way to Duna now and you just saved me some trial and error.. That said, I've kind of settled on 150K orbits for motherships/bases where docking maneuvers are common. It offers plenty of room for low / fast orbits and keeping it consistent means it's a lot easier to remember

Mac over Console because Mods - they still work on mac despite what some people have said earlier in this thread Keyboard - the game really needs more inputs than you can get on a console controller. It'll work on a console, but having all the extra keys makes it a lot easier to play. Heating issues. Make sure you have good airflow around the machine and possibly get a cooling stand of some sort. Macs are well engineered, but the designs favor slim design and playing a game that really taxes the processor for hours will push the envelope. It's also summer right now, don't know if you live in a hot climate or have air conditioning, but that could be a factor too. if your room temp is high and you don't have good airflow around the machine you're kind of making it tough for any computer.