longbyte1

I never thought ants had a demand for prosthetic limbs and machines.

Quite an interesting KSP career you have. Keep it up!

There is something horribly wrong with this.

Your videos are interesting, but here's some advice you might want to hear from me: • Don't be so promotional. Your sidebars have too much fluff in them, which is distracting. I'd rather have black bars than a KSP logo on them. Also, why add "Subscribe" everywhere when you already have about 1000 subscribers? • You should only go for the partnership when you have enough videos and views to attract more people. Sure, you might want a few dollars a week, but if you start early for partnership and don't be consistent, people will turn away from you. Like an air-breathing engine/scramjet, use the partnership to turbocharge your channel and maximize output (revenue, views, etc.), but it only works when you already have an audience and you have their full attention. • Add tags and a good description. This is key to getting viewers since the search engine/indexer knows how to categorize your video and connect it with other KSP channels. Business might run a bit slow since there are many Minecraft and KSP channels out there, but keep up with your videos and people will find you soon!

Ahem, let me correct that, sorry. On NORMAL laptops you can't run many games on it.

(Please replace Computer with Desktop.) I use my desktop. My laptop is used to kill time, and it can only run low-end stuff. I despise common laptops because they come with too much bloatware and made people think that you could really run games on a laptop in 2012. No, you still can't run BF3 on super high quality on your new laptop. [/rant] So on what do you play KSP on? Your laptop or your desktop computer?

4 GB should be adequate memory to at least load KSP and run any other programs you might have. A GPU/graphics card should also do to get KSP to run smoother. Integrated chipsets on your laptop will not do the trick. In fact, don't run your games on your laptop. Run it on your desktop. Laptops are horrible for gaming, especially the bloatware they put on top.

Really good, but it should sound somewhat computerized and must be free by price and by license (GPL, CC-BY-SA, MIT license, BSD license, etc.).

I could not find any better TTS engines or voices (tell me if you find any open-source high quality voices [Apple did not make Siri, they bought Siri]), so I just used Speakonia. I might use a better voice and put this into a plugin. So here are the voice files: http://filesmelt.com/downloader/kspTTS.zip Tell me what you think!

MU and MBM models are just another format that developers use to export models. This is generated mainly by Unity and is much more flexible than DAE. Most KSP resources are held in the KSP_Data folder, where they are archived in a format that is only readable by the game for now (until someone makes an asset snooper ). As for the in-vehicle Kerbals, I have no idea how they work and in what part of the level/scene they are in.

How in the world is this done? Center of gravity? Kerbals taking turns throwing themselves against the wall?

Thats it. Its only some minor actions left - like attach textures, convert all this stuff into .mu 3d files and create a config file and your first part ready, working great and makes everybodys bleed from awesomeness =) I use Blender, and I'm familiar with the essentials. However, I don't have Unity installed, nor do I know how to use it.

Fixed, you can help me now.

So I have a simple aerospike-like part: With a node_collider object on it, just how the tutorial said to do: Here's how it turns out in the PartLab: What am I doing wrong? And how do I make objects be able to be snapped onto other objects? Are there any tutorials on how to do KSP parts correctly? Any help is appreciated!

Someone really needs to update this. I've been figuring out why the node_collider object is still visible.

Wait, what exactly will the update bring that's so exiting?

You know that little tiny 3 part rocket (pod, 1/2 1m tank, aerospike rocket)? I flew it a few days ago, but I realized something. That little rocket sure can't carry anything more than itself, can it? So its payload is virtually zero. What about that super giant rocket that you take to the Mun to make some Munar base? Its payload is probably 10 mass (what exactly is the unit for mass?). I have not made a formula yet, but in theory the more delta-v a rocket would have would affect the amount of payload it can carry. Right? I want some feedback on this, please. I can't really grip this because I am not a physicist or rocket scientist or anything like that, but I don't want to look stupid because it's an obvious fact that the more delta-v there is, the more payload you can carry.

Some people just want to get something to work. Maybe they're focusing on how efficient the rocket is, how much payload can it carry. Maybe people are focusing on the orbits and just getting on the Mun and not the rocket itself. The usage of MechJeb really depends on what you're using it for.

If I made such kind of website, I'd require a captcha and add a flag button for spam/bad stuff, viruses, etc.

Probably none. I'm probably going to create some comet across the system.

Which one's going to be the employee of the month?

Awesome renderings!

Introducing the MHM. Go wherever you want* at minimal thrust. (*everywhere except space) Also has excellent SAS maneuvering.

How do I find out the center of mass? This seems pretty complicated to do.

Questions: How does the part collide with other objects? Can you close it without the parts flying away? What about working as a ladder? What happens when Kerbals try to climb on it? And wait a minute, you even added BUMP MAPPING on it?! Here's a description: "Made from the space center's old storage room doors, the cargo bay is an adequate and air-tight solution to storing debris and other parts reliably. Too bad our boss said to make it fit only on those Mk3 airplanes; his excuse was to make it Jebediah-proof."