dok_377

It sounds like the infamous robotic drift bug. To fix it (at least partially), you need to install KSP Community Fixes. This mod also has a bunch of other fixes as well.

You might not want to use this one. It's extremely unoptimized and and was thrown together without any consideration, it uses way more resources than it needs to. It's also just a repackaged version of other mods, so not really original (stolen, more like). You can see a more detailed review at the last page from Gameslinx. If you want to use graphics mods, just download Spectra or AVP.

I think it's F.

There has to be a more specific way of reproducing it. I'm not that much of a plane builder, though I have built enough to see what this is about, but I never had control surfaces that were rolling instead of pitching. The WASDQE controls are always as I set them up to be. It's the deployment feature that's inverting and it only can be seen through pressing "deploy", not through controlling the craft. You must have a certain way of building for them to be inverted even with direct controls.

I just finished my big Minmus science collection mission. Here's some screenshots: The station with the lander in orbit of Minmus, mission beginning. The same station after 9 landings were completed. You can see the lack of SC-9001's on the station. This is because the lander was leaving them on the surface as beacons after each landing. The map of SC-9001 modules on the surface. Some screenshots of the transfer stage with the return module going back to Kerbin. The upper part of the return module was jettisoned, exposing the return capsule. The return capsule with the remainder of the return module. It gets jettisoned just before entry. The capsule was recovered with 105 experiments, which netted a whopping 3482 science points. All 9 landing in a collage.

@Gotmachine FYI, you probably need to set an ignore flag or something like that in the dragcube generation patch for decals from Conformal Decals. With the patch enabled, these parts act like wings and create a lot of force, especially if set at an angle. Doesn't really matter if they are inside a fairing either. Maybe it's because they have no drag model at all, it's set to dragModel = NONE and the patch doesn't know how to handle that. The easiest way to see the effect is to build a simple rocket with a decal at an angle and launch it, the rocket will veer off course almost immediately.

The post was made in February, not a month ago. Maybe the vote was edited in a month ago, correct me if I'm wrong. But the last edit was in May, which is still way longer than a month.

Go to Collide-o-Scope\PluginData and change _defaultEnabled = True to _defaultEnabled = False in settings.cfg file.

I just randomly checked the settings file and it seems like the patch was left disabled by mistake. Downloaded the archive again just to be sure, and yep, it's set to false in the config.

As I said, it doesn't do that by itself, you need to know a specific way to do it. The game itself is full of exploits like these even without any dlc. Landing gear kraken drive, for example. It does not require any fuel and practically has infinite range with extreme speeds. But that knowledge will not make you not use any landing gear because they're sus, will it? The game also has a debug menu with cheats, by the way.

How is KAL "hacking", exactly? It's just a sequencer. And a very powerful sequencer, at that. You can do some pretty cool stuff with it, and as far as I know, not a single mod has the same functionality as KAL. It's pretty sophisticated for what it is. Sure, it has some exploits as well, but you need to know how to do them, it doesn't "hack" anything by itself. And the game is full of exploits even without it anyway. Be aware, though, this mod also has a lot of bugs in it. Last time I've seen it, it had a pretty bad editor symmetry bug that affected stock game parts, not just robotic parts.

I'm not betting on anything, could not care less. But I don't agree with the claim that games like No Man's Sky or Starfield are going to lure players away from KSP. These games can't be compared with KSP in my opinion, because they are doing completely different things from KSP. In KSP you design and manage your own missions, think about how to build crafts, how to fly them, and how to make it all work in relatevely realistic physics. Not just fly premade ships some places with no real orbital mechanics or physics in general. Starfield lets you customize (but not build from scratch with your own custom design) ships, sure, but you don't even need to think about placement, it all disregards physics completely and "just works". And flight pretty much does not exist, it's all just done through loading screens anyway, you can't even pilot the ship down to the surface manually. As for Juno, it is practically the same game as KSP and it existed for a while now but the majority of players prefer KSP still. I don't think this will suddenly just change overnight. But whatever, I'm not here to argue, just wanted to see your take on this, that's all.

Genuinely curious about what you consider competition. As far as I know, there's only one game that does the same stuff as KSP, it's Juno, but even Juno can't compete with player numbers KSP gets even after all these years. Maybe some other games like Spaceflight Simulator, but they are only 2D and don't have the same depth, no pun intended. Games like No Man's Sky and others are not competition, it's a completely different game and you can't even build your ships. There's no games that do stuff KSP does, and even if they do, they don't have the same character and soul. Just remembered about Rocket Science, but this game is definitely not going to be competing with KSP any time soon. The player numbers are non existent, literally. It hit 30 players at launch in 2020, that's it, and right now it's 3 players per week at best.

There's your problem. 1080 is probably not enough to run these clouds at 4K. Scatterer itself has very little in terms of performance impacts. If you're using what R-T-B is talking about, that is.

I think I was one of the people who suggested the toggle for collapsed sections. So I guess it was forgotten about, because it was added to github, but never actually implemented.