XLjedi

@SQUAD They don't free swing anymore... Locked = No Motorized = No On Power Loss = Free ...and the hinge no longer swings free like it did in 1.8.1. Anyone notice anything else broken in robotics now? I find these bugs in like the first five minutes of play time with 1.9. Do you not have a fleet of 10-20 craft you test before releasing these updates? Docking ports that are docked to "Own Craft" also still will not undock via action key. https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24866

I might have to print myself a smiling picture cutout of Jeb and stick it to my back window now... Like he's peeking out at the people behind me.

Although 1.4 and beyond wrecked several of my favorite craft... The Mk3 Cargo Bay collider debacle (sorta fixed, but still not what it was in 1.3) The countless landing gear interaction with ground issues that destroyed my moon bases The abysmal (and destructive) interactions related to docking with own craft Trying to use the Claw without destroying the craft involved Bugs that disallow self-docked parts to undock themselves via Action Group keys The Wheesley and Goliath engine fixes that no one asked for or wanted (I still miss the reverse thrust on my submarine, and honestly why not allow people to stack/embed engines?) The Wolfhound engine to build that "more powerful" interplanetary mothership that you always wanted! Oh wait, nevermind we didnt' actually mean to do that. Introducing rotor blades in 1.7 and then deciding they all need to be reworked in 1.8, and hey why not add cyclic in 1.9 and stir the pot some more... That's just off the top-o-my-head in terms of things that aggravate me; I'm sure I could fill the page if I tried! In spite of it all, I still find things to build that are fun. I'm really excited to see if my next idea will work, the initial tests have been positive! ...and in the process, I'll probably trip over 3 or 4 new ideas to build upon. I think the most fun that I have with the game is when I set out to solve a specific problem or task with a certain idea in mind. Then in the process of working and re-working the design a totally different approach to solve the problem presents itself and works wonderfully! I had another of those moments this morning, and I'm looking forward to further testing this evening and through the weekend. So yeah, they break stuff constantly, and infuriate me at times... I have been able to rework a number of my craft to adapt with the latest versions of the game. So "Adapt and Overcome" has been a bit of a mantra in my space program. Your designs are far more complex than my mission-oriented craft and I can see where the frustration might be a bit overwhelming. I imagine the tolerances on some/most of your designs are very tight and the constant tweakings between updates and the Unity engine could very well be too much to endure. So I do empathize. As long as I can find something fun to do next, the game will probably keep me around. I do wish they would be a little more respectful of the time and effort some folks may have put into their fleet of (sometimes beloved) craft before making some sweeping change or a cosmetic rework that damages the function/looks of long-time favorite craft. In the games of the past that I left behind, it was actually this element (developers damaging or obsoleting my hours/days/months work) that have turned me against them. I'm not quite there yet with Kerbal, but the idea of losing robotics and propellers/rotors in 2.0 does really bring me down.

Really? are they using a different keyboard when they typed multiple pages on this thread without managing to hit a single special character? As I already said, copy/paste does not work for me. ...might be my browser though. For instance, I don't have an option to "Paste as plain text" and even if I take the (extreme) third step of copy/pasting into notepad, and then paste into this forum... the backspace method you mention doesn't work for me.

@έķ νίĻĻάίή On a side note, your username is unusually aggravating to try to tag with "@" tools due to the use of special characters... Maybe at a minimum consider changing the first 2 to "Ek " so people can tag you to draw your attention to posts on the forum. Copy & pasting as I did above, does not trigger the forum tools. If you are going to host things like this, you may want to consider fixing that. So people can tag you in the thread like you are tagging us in your replies above.

@έķ νίĻĻάίή Thanks for admission! The Barracuda does go inside spaceplanes too. Do I need to post a video of a Mk3 spaceplane landing on Lathe with the UV-14 Barracuda to get Traveler status? I s'pose I could take the Monarch to Lathe again if I had too? https://kerbalx.com/XLjedi/SC-20-Monarch Also, I would be happy to assist with badge development. I'm fairly competent with GIMP and have made several badges for various things. I might also suggest the following name/acronym for your society: "Kerbal Nautical Orientation and Traveler Society" (KNOTS) It would be a lot easier to fit the acronym "KNOTS" on a badge and have it remain visible at various sizes.

Based on the pic... work on your wings. When the wings look proportional to the fuselage, it will probably fly fine.

Without a link to the actual plane, or even maybe a picture... About all I could say is, the problem is most likely related to "something" on your plane.

Are these OK? I put em here in a zip folder. They are 640x640 PNG files and I included the GIMP file I made. I took about half of them almost straight from the game. http://xl-logic.com/KSP/icons/Achievement_Icons.zip

Depends, for some of my more advanced craft, it could be months before I post it. Other stuff I've had laying around for a year and decide to dust it off and post it. As for the question, I don't right-click it... I was just mous-ing over parts so you could see what I was referring to in the video on-screen text. Everything on those models are tied to the Action Keys that I mention in the video. You can download the Hurricane and see the action key assignments that I call out in the video. 2 action keys control the blades. However, the Pufferfish and my helos are newer designs that do take advantage of the KAL-1000 for some of the more advanced features and ECM mapping. Which are also pretty interesting craft.

@Zeiss Ikon Does it (by chance) allow you to repair/replace the failed parts while deployed? Maybe if an engineer is on board? That's probably my only aversion to part failure mods, is the ability to make repairs in space (aside from KAS/KIS). I'd hate for a huge part to break with no hope for repairs.

The Hurricane tops out at over 100 m/s on water Initial launch from the runway (no mods to move into the water required) Carries a helo, submarine, and various rovers Submarine has been to the "Eye-of-the-Smiley" (deepest part of Kebin) The Cudafish fits in a Mk3 Cargo Bay. I've seen some pics of it on other planets. Each craft is posted to KerbalX The pufferfish is my amphibious crane and salvage craft. ...and there's a little jet rescue boat on this helicopter.

I'll do like a master at 128x128 and then we can resize for the smaller ones. I can also share the GIMP file if folks want to recolor it.

If you just need some icons, I would volunteer on the graphics... I'm fairly competent in that area. (if no others step up) I would just need to know, what accomplishments you want and the size and format you need them in.

@Hotel26 Meh... I don't mind cheating a scaffold into orbit for a minute. In my mind that's no worse than using two mods as a "cheat". If I made a mod that used an invisible part to do the same exact thing, in order to add certain "target orbits" to my guidance system, it would then not be a cheat? This is something the spacecraft would just have in the guidance system and is more of a UI programming shortfall than anything. I also have a docking alignment indicator mod that I don't consider a cheat. ...anymore than I would consider Kerbal Alarm or the KER features a cheat. These are all things a spacecraft would just have. But, I do need to install Kerbal Alarm anyway... and I already have KER, so maybe I give it a try?

I want the parts in stock or expansion... portability of parts between players to me is paramount, and I imagine as we move into a new 2.0 multiplayer world, this may become even more important to me. I limit mods to UI enhancements and keep them out of my hangars and aerodynamics.

@linuxgurugamer I will take a look. Thanks Edit: OK, I looked... neither seems to remotely describe what I want to do. Although, it mentions parts are placed in inventory and appear in editor, it doesn't seem to mention how the parts got there in the first place? Do you have to initially buy each part that you place in inventory? If so, I may be interested in Scrapyard! ...although not really what I was looking for initially. Oh Scrap, for now, I think I can do without. I do appreciate you pointing them out though. Thank you.

Because it's a mod... and not shareable, unless others have the mod. Then again, that's my typical response to anyone who suggests just use mod part "X". I like mods for gameplay enhancements, but not for parts.

Okay... wasn't suggesting it was some new addition to the game. My lightbulb is just a little dimmer than yours.

@Noud BTW, those locks you put on the tree do look pretty cool. I think tieing those to completing specific "Unlock" missions would be a great addition to the game! For instance, the unlock mission for supersonic flight might be to create a rocket plane that breaks the speed of sound. Maybe a "Test this part" mission (with a part in that next locked node) in conjunction with an objective like break sound barrier is required for the unlock! I would be supportive of that sort of lock on every single node. I like the idea of having to specifically test the new part in some mission specific way before the node can be unlocked.

In my current playthru, I did notice one interesting dynamic that had previously eluded me... If you accept the missions to test equipment that has not already been unlocked... and you purposefully avoid completing those missions... You have access to the locked part for the life of the contract. Gave me early access to the panther engine before I had Supersonic Flight unlocked, which let me use a certain jet design in my hangar earlier than usual. If only I could generate those contracts at will (maybe a system to put out RFP's for skunkworks contracts?), but maybe pay a very hefty price to do so? I could buy expensive access to a skunkworks version of the RAPIER without waiting so long on science farming. I'd still like to be able to do the missions and unlock the nodes, but I think there's room for some additional creativity.

I do like those Cubs for landers... I was able to make a 2-man Mun lander that fits in a Mk2 cargo bay with a single Cub. I guess I have to take back all the mean things I've said about the MH expansion now. There is at least one useful part buried in there.

It's on my todo list... presently, I've only done it with a spaceplane and Mk3 hangar. But I might prefer something dedicated and docked to a Mun orbital station that can transfer goods from surface to station.

@Kerbas_ad_astra Speaking of which... The default background color of dark-dark-blue/black is rather inconvenient for post processing. How can I change the background color now? A color selector would be preferable, or if it has to be static a bit lighter of a blue would help the GIMP tools differentiate between the background and darker ship parts.

@5thHorseman Actually, the thought of just cheating something into orbit temporarily had never crossed my mind but does seem so obvious now. That may very well be my preferred approach. Then once I have my station properly aligned, I can just wipe it.