ARS

You mean war of the world miniature board game? Yeah

Space Battleship Volgograd Heavy Carrier Ark And Soviet Superheavy tank

Mystery goo report: the goo feels right at home here So... it's their remains?

Also, I got bored today, so here's what I made: Done in just 3 hours on A5 paper

You got the point! Her inspiration is indeed the "white death". And her name is from Inuit goddess of Sedna (which the planet is named for, and to fit the "winter" theme)

Here's mine: My original character, Sednis the winter sniper (I named her after Sedna)

No no no, this isn't about making something stealthed in space. It's about disguising an object to look like an orbital debris. Stealth is pretty much impossible in space, but a disguise COULD work, right? Making something invisible in space to avoid detection is not gonna work, but making something appear like stuff people won't take a second glance is still possible. The main question is, could we use a satellite with a passive sensor to monitor the surrounding area (no active usage at all) while it's disguised as a debris or defunct satellite?

I'm typing the letter inside my school's library, then when I'm about to print it on the office, I panicked since I realized my ID card is gone from my wallet. I'm searching it all day to no avail, until, when I'm returned to the library I remembered that I'm using my ID card to get the permission to use the library in the first place

True enough. Most countermeasure against radar detection isn't about making the target invisible, it's about minimizing the return signal towards the radar. Stealth aircraft often have weird or unnatural shape in order to create optimum deflection angle against incoming radar signal

Sounds like a good idea

I get it that "stealth in space" is pretty much impossible. But with so many space debris out there, is it possible to "disguise" a satellite as a debris/ defunct satellite? (Cut all systems, go into passive sensor and keep watch of surrounding area)

The size of any of those 3 types of weapons (bullets includes machine guns, gatling, cannons, autocannons, railguns) would be roughly around current day weapons for fighter aircraft, aka attachable to one man fighter. The target itself is (assumed to be) a swarm of space based drones (soccer ball- sized spherical ball with omnidirectional RCS thrusters on 6 sides, able to make sudden movement on one direction and coordinated movement) the target's protection is a simple ball shaped titanium frame around 10mm thick around it

You're not the only one experiencing it. I've experienced it too, even now. My guess is, judging from my previous KSP playthrough, version 1.3 seems to be unstable compared to 1.2. Back then, even though my computer considered as potato-class, I could run a planet pack with graphic mods and parts pack with no problem at all in 1.2, but as soon as I installed 1.3, even a planet pack (without graphic or part mods) cause a heavy HDD usage that strains my computer (And always ends in error message crash). I don't know what causing this, but I suspect (judging from what I see in my tests) KSP 1.3 seems causing a heavy strain to the system if there's several mods installed. Not sure if this could help, but my solution to make me able to play KSP with mods that I wanted is by having several KSP folder in a single drive (Folder 1 for spaceplanes, folder 2 for rockets, folder 3 for weapons, etc.)

If we somehow able to fire current day weapons in space, which one that's most effective in terms of damage, accuracy and range between lasers, bullets and missiles?

Probably. Their face seems different between zero G and non zero G environment

You mean something like VLS fired from underwater out of water and then drop the torpedo from the air? I'm still a bit confused about the prospect of underwater gyrojet. In real life, the project is designated as a failure of a weapon since when fired (on the air) it starts slow and then gaining speed. The problem is, from what I know, it deals almost no damage from point blank range since the bullet starts slow, yet the rocket motor makes it innacurate from long range since it tends to veer off course. What the difference it makes underwater? Which generates even more resistance than air?

Ion engines, because I don't want to wait for hours to complete my burn Largest rover wheel, because my mining rig is always static and use landing legs instead Nuke engines, because I'm pretty bad at managing heat (and it's heavy)

So far, I've seen several kinds of underwater weapons, such as torpedoes, depth charges, mines, harpoons, etc. Being underwater, ballistic weapons have a limitation of water resistance that severely limits their effectiveness. What I want to ask is: -does railguns make a good weapon underwater? Especially with it's extremely high projectile velocity? (Assume it's size and caliber is around current day destroyer main gun) -how about lasers? Especially high intensity laser (assume it's size is same like railguns mentioned above) What kind of advantage (if any) and disadvantage of those two weapons above if used underwater? Or if any of you have an idea for a theoretical underwater weapons, let me know about it Anyway, thanks for your answer

Landed all the way to tylo and doing EVA... forget ladders (Dang it!) Cannot use any planet mods on 1.3 Random crashes when loading KSP

If you spell every letters when counting numbers starting from 1, you will encounter your first letter "A" in number 1000

Looks normal to me, the 0_o face seems natural when you are in orbit

Well, I lost count about how many times I killed jeb too. But since I've played this game for about 3-4 years, and judging about how often my career play is VERY explosive (pun intended) I can say that it's... A LOT Don't worry, he's always managed to come back, since he's a BadAss

Install janitor closet (JC) mod. This allows you to filter out your installed mod. The most resource intensive mods are part mods and graphic mods, mainly because part mods takes a while to load all of the parts installed, even if you never have or never needed that part (ex: huge artilleries in weapons mod that you never gonna use anyway). Using JC mod, you can sort and filter installed part mods and "blacklist" specific parts, allowing them to be permanently not loaded during gameplay (you can revert this, careful though, any active craft that happens to be using blacklisted parts will be missing), saving some RAM and performance since there's less parts to be handled. But then, of course the most resource intensive mod is graphic mod. Those can really slow down the gameplay to a crawl (though it does looks absolutely beautiful). Usually minimum RAM for graphic-intensive gameplay is around 16 GB for smooth performance (not counting other mods). My usual method for part mods is having several KSP folders, each with their own specialization (ex: KSP folder 1 for spaceplanes, folder 2 for rockets, etc.), so I can still enjoy all part mods without suffering performance drop or having to reinstall mods. As for graphic mods, I cannot say anything, since my laptop isn't powerful enough to run even a scatterer without having my FPS plummeted to a crawl

Hmm... that's quite weird. Maybe it has something to do with SOI of the planet. My guess is there's a minimum threshold of gravity/ SOI for a planet depending on it's size. Having large sized bodies (like tylo, which have a high gravity, and theoretically large SOI) but with smaller SOI (like gilly) seems to be the one causing the bug, maybe you can simply ignore setting SOI and focus on the gravity. Test several values of the gravity to adjust the SOI until it sets to your liking

Happy to help