ErgionThorn

many ppl dont mod because wanna play on the long run and in that case mods will most likely break the savegame, you cant play after bigger releases until the mods are updated, IF they get updated... im one of those play only with my own mods, there is nothing elitism in it. thats a fact that many mod gives advantage so when its about a challenge its obvious stock and modded crafts cant be measured the same way but other than that? i cant see any other problems. if you play with mods or not it doesnt affect me so why would i care? this is a single player game. when in crafts there is (STOCK!) in name it just means anybody can use it, no need for mods. simple... i dont even understand where these thoughts are coming.

nope, there are no 500 clones because they have no mean of selling it. no official channel will ever take it on and on illegal channels nobody pays for it... its so easy to decompile the game even right now, its just illegal and most would not even take the time. ppl are not as bad as you think they are.

there are no 500 clones of spaceengineers either... it was actually you stating that this is a big job and ppl have better things to do. dont even mention that giving out the codes under a licence doesnt mean others have the right to release it and im sure no distributor would ever sell its modified copies... you are worrying too much.

ahh, i see, to be honest, i read OP-s post rather like offering money to make it open source, i dont think he actually want to take the entire development off the hands of squad though i might be wrong

lol. again: why would the modders band together in a glorious team? the status of the game wouldnt even change at all, it would just give access to the public to look into the base code now we can only imagine how it works...

maybe for you <MODERATOR REDACTED> exactly my first thought when i saw the title. you shouldnt have to buy it. for all the naysayers, opening up the gamecode wouldnt necessarily mean any change at all. the game should be still squad's property, they should be the only ones to edit and release the STOCK game, but as with SE it could give a better insight for the modders who could bring in even better and stronger mods, give advice on fixing issues or might even give complete solutions. i have a better question: Would making KSP open source cause it to be any worse then it is? looking at the commitment of a great modding community I can hardly imagine such thing...

here you go, this is how physics work you still dont understand the difference between the pushed and pulled objects, they are completely different... i will give it a last try: do you realise the difference between them? first one is a fighter jet. has big heavy rear light pointy nose... its being pushed from its rear the second one is an old biplane, it has big heavy nose and nearly weightless rear only with the fin and wings there... whoaaahh, its being pulled. simple physics...

im completely calm drawing sketch for you nobody cares really, im not here to convince you

well, even if he would, how would that fit into this topic?

nope, it will not fly better, it will fly worse. just try it. poor try, ive sent many many many rockets, ive been everywhere in kerbol, i have over 400 hours in the game simply i dont push my head into sand when i see an issue.. just because you can send up rockets and dont even notice the issues doesnt mean you have better understanding on aerodynamics.

nope.. its again not true, GO CHECK THAT CRAP CRAFT INGAME!!! instead of coming back with pointless post... "You're trying to shoot arrows backwards and wondering why it doesn't work" omfg, can you even... argh? what did i say? " the lever of arm what you are talking about, again, only matters of free flying objects like an arrow that is shot and flies away being dragged by the weight of the arrowhead " so i agree that the weight on top does matter for the arrow what is your answer? " You're trying to shoot arrows backwards and wondering why it doesn't work" and some are wondering why ppl lose their temper...

nope, you are totally wrong, sry. in aerodynamics, com doesnt matter, its the surfaces that matter. the most weight at the top will make the craft trip over... the lever of arm what you are talking about, again, only matters of free flying objects like an arrow that is shot and flies away being dragged by the weight of the arrowhead, its not the case with rockets that has a continuous force pushing from the rear... in that case the lever of arm between the com and the thrust is DE-stabilizing the craft. anyway, instead of just posting and posting, did you take your time to check the stock craft i was mentioning? and why is that nobody build rockets with the orange tanks at the top and the pod on the bottom? it would be possible. on irl rockets why the cargo is on the top while those ar mostly just lightweight satellites and the lots of fuel and rockets are at the bottom? cmon, it dont even need physics knowledge just common sense

nope, you have it backwards... if its draggy, but rockets tend to be not draggy, they are pointy and their tail is draggy... thats how rockets are designed. yeas, i know thats what i was saying too, capslock doesnt really help, it just makes the slam smaller though with proper modelling forces could be applied based on a parabolic curve like force = deltatime^2 so the longer you hold the key the higher the force applied, obviously maxed at the strength of the original force. would solve lots of issues with keyboard controls. also, its still an issue with physics as it shouldnt bob back down, it should just harshly turn upward... nobody said com should be behind col, its obviously flipping a craft but col should be far around the rear of the craft while com should be behind the geometric center as close to the rear but in front of the col, if you want i will make a sketch up for you.. if you put the weight on the top of the rocket it will make the pushing force tripping over the craft. what is your mistake is that aerodynamics doesnt care of com, it has things to do with the thrust, aerodynamics cares of col and the geometric center of all the surfaces affected... rear drag and front weight does only matter for object freeflying and not if they are being pushed. anyway, just check the stock rockets, there is one with an orange tank and carries i think just a small fuel tank in the bay...its top is light, its rear is heavy, com is behind the center and it flies very well... so what are we even talking about? the best proofs are the simple stock crafts

nope, it wont happen irl... try it with a model plane. you can experience it first hand which is not true, firstly, on a thing being pushed you want the weight on its rear to have the com closer to the trust so there is a smaller arm and imperfections will move the craft out the least... its the opposite of having a freeflying or pulled object where you want the weight on its front, secondly, when you are slightly turning in atmosphere there is nothing like massive pushing on the sides of the rocket, there is actually barely any sideway pressure unless you are turning in big angles. try it, push your finger into butter and try suddenly turn it while its still moving. it wont break your finger, actually it will smoothen the turn. the very same thing is happening in the air because the atmospheric pressure is applied at EVERY single point of the craft...

except its not 999 vs 1, there are plenty of others right on this very forum complaining about many aspects of the physics still being flawed. ive built plenty of crazy planes, my latest to be a weird x-wing of some sort and they fly, they are just not flying like they would irl. like touching the pitch up makes it pitch up for a moment just to start its nose swinging up and down. now, while its annoying it would be acceptable when you have sas. most likely fatal when you dont. or rockets ive just managed to take to mun with 3 crewmembers barely on tech 3, sadly they have landed with the last drops of fuel so no return until higher tier but twice out of 4 launch it went out rolling over and the bad is not that its rolling over, that happens with an unbalanced design, the bad is that it keeps spinning around its horizontal axis and not even around the com. now it should either turn around and fall back, then its drag would be wrong or start spinning around its com but this is just out of reality. its rather about that ppl take many things as their own fault even if it flies once fine and trips over the other time well, this is what mostly happens with rockets except i dont have to steer hard (well, with keyboard there is no other way as its not an analog, there is only full turning or no turning) but i just wanna make a tiny, few degrees initial turn around 6-7000 and it makes the rocket tripping over unstoppable. now with nearly every rockets that are not just a single line of fuel tanks and pod on top with some big winglets on the bottom this happens so i just have to fly straight up until that stage is over or reach the space and then i can navigate. and the sad is that most people just swallow this like his own fault and say, ohh well, i have to learn to fly in ksp, tho' its really ksp's flaw, those rockets should fly like arrows just because of their huge momentum... i still manage to go to anywhere in ksp, this is not that challenging game some wanna claim, this is a very intuitive game so with pure logic everything can be flown (just like panzer1b said) but these problems can turn down quickly those who cant accept every flawed solutions. after 400 hours, at least for me, these are flaws i cant look over, thats why in the op post i was asking to get this fixed. also landed crafts on wheel, fully braked, keep sliding even uphill in random directions planes are jumping or rolling of the runway one thing anybody can try even with stock planes. choose a bigger, heavier one with front winglets. take off, keep flying straight, when its stable just touch the down pitch, then the up pitch (obviously with keyboard, i dont have joy but it should work with keyboards too) simulating like doing little corrections in elevation. what should happen is that when you pitch up or down, the plane slightly change direction up or down. instead in ksp its like hitting the top or bottom of the plane with a huge hammer, it raise its nose suddenly then dropping back and if its a big enough plane it will start swinging up and down... i dont even need to make a video of this, im 100% sure it works like this for everybody.

i answered you but it was removed... i have had a fresh install on steam with no mods at all and a newly started career game, and its not one craft or just planes but every craft, no matter if rocket or plane or just a brick thrown. i have myself nearly 4 years of experience with ksp too and built many things, flown many things, big and small, and gigantic, i can get over the wobbling of parts etc (that actually improved a lot during the past years) but how currently all the crafts are flipping over again and again like if trust vectors would be in 90 degrees compared to the original vectors is not funny, or when lifting start working the opposite way (yayyy, pull it up, pull it up! i do pull it up, i dont know why we are turning downward) etc etc etc are not funny. now ive decided to reinstall and to make a few videos about it... not like if it wouldnt work the same way for everybody...

well, if you can be amused by this its you having issues not me. I know people who can have a blast with cow poo, that doesnt make it a viable option for me. stop trolling!

well, i guess im not the only one hating the tripping over swinging crafts that fly like being attached to a string defying any real physics, imo before any graphical changes or more parts etc these things should have priority. I know aerodynamics just have got an overhaul but i think it was rushed as its absolutely not working, though its closer to realistic than the old one but it has so many flaws its just unplayable. pls squad, i dont want any other things in ksp, its good as it is with the parts and gameplay it has just fix the physics...

i remember too, it was long time ago, somewhen around 2013, i was playing ksp about 2 hours ago, in the next hour ive landed on the mun... never ever even used mechjeb. on the 3rd day i had a superspaceship that was able to fly all over the kerbol system and at the end return to kerbin, carried a couple of thugs (3 irc). nearly all the fueltanks, hichiker units antennas etc were brought up with a separate craft and docked together up there. later ive rebuilt it with 3*3 hubmax matrix (now that was difficult to connect, even with perfect alignment usually only 2 pairs connected out of the 3) that one had 5 thugs, 4 landers and 2 big rovers... this game is really intuitive despite all of its flaws.

which all doesn't matter as the car wheels are fitted behind the suspension joint that creates a self-aligning force that is so much stronger than all the imperfections of the roads (of course im talking about well maintained roads not some quarry roads) that it will keep the car going straight. if your car cant keep the track it has VERY badly worn tyres or awful misalignment and you should visit a service because that car isnt fit to be used on public roads and its dangerous. I can drive on our motorways miles without even touching the steering wheel. now, airport runways should be like motorways and not like quarry roads and planes should be able to take off without rolling off the runway...

which is a perfectly wrong statement as cars WILL keep straight tracks what more in elevated bends with the right speed they will perfectly follow the bend... the steering of planes is so wrong once it started to go off the straight line you will never direct it back... i dont know if you have ever seen a plane taking off wildly swerving like cyclists around potholes...

i wish for a physics fix but thats very unlikely

i wish they would fix aerodynamics first, its still not working...