LittleBitMore

I mean, if it's all airbrakes, then they should be attached to the system. And the system can be attached either radially or in a stack, it's your choice.

I meant to add the payload weight and subtract the landing system weight. I'll fix that now-- greatest apologies. No, and if you don't have it, it can be replaced with Infernal Robotics if you like. Of course. Homemade airbrakes will be bigger though.

When a certain world event caused a stock market crash, the landing engine companies and parachute companies took the biggest hits and are on the brink of bankruptcy. While these companies recover, the Kerbal Space Program dreams of landing systems forged with the other parts they have lying around, powerful enough to land 250 tons of liquid fuel, on Tylo. Perhaps these dreams aren't so nonsensical after all. This brings us to the challenge at hand: creating a unique landing system to provide alternatives to parachutes or powered landings. The goal is to invent a new system for landing safely, scored based on its capabilities, unique-ness, and specifications. Rules: READ ALL THE RULES BEFORE SUBMITTING, as well as the score system. This way you know what you need to make and what you're aiming not to do. The system must let your craft land intact on the target planet (excluding any parts you let intentionally fall off or break in the descent system). Meaning your payload must survive, but if your landing system is one time use, then so be it. The return must be from 70km or higher. This is so you don't make a flat panel on the bottom of a huge payload, make it jump a meter, and call it a day. This is for all planets to provide equal descent times (to an extent). It must be the only significant method of slowing down. Meaning if there were fins for stabilization that happened to minorly affect the return, this is allowed, but not adding huge wings that slow it down almost all the way, then saying an entirely different system did it all. It must stay landed eventually and must not take off again. Fairly straightforwards: it must land for good, eventually. it can bounce and stuff, but to count it must eventually stop bouncing. You can only use these four celestial bodies: Kerbin, Duna, Mun, and Tylo. Each have different score based on their difficulty, with Kerbin being the easiest and Tylo being the hardest. The system should be easy to remove and replace back on another craft and must attach from one part. Meaning if I were to have the craft file then it should be relatively easy to pull that one part off (and consequentially remove the entire thing), and tape it to something else entirely (with similar size and stuff, of course). This includes all propellants or expendable resources used in the landing system. No stock parachutes, or powered engine descents. You can however make homemade parachutes (somehow) or use engines in creative ways that aren't just direct descents. I will determine whether it is good or no good. No parts mods. In addition, no cheats or other unfair mods. QOL, autopilot, and visual mods are all allowed. Infernal Robotics is allowed to allow players who don't have Breaking Ground to have advanced robotics systems. You can use the cheat mods or alt-f12 to hack yourself 70km above the planet if you want. Please provide evidence. Imgur albums with sufficient enough images are allowed, but videos are preferred. In addition, craft files also work, but it's recommended to have both a video and a craft file. Provide payload specifications as well as descent time. Only I can score. While you can technically legally follow the scoring stuff, there are a few things that need to be based on unbiased opinion and ergo I must do myself. When i score your design, I will put you on the leaderboard. Scoring: Start with 1000 points, then follow the following steps IN ORDER. Subtract the descent time (from 70km to final touchdown) in seconds from the current score, with a maximum of 300 seconds (any more will only subtract 300). Add 250 if it is fully reusable and requires no refueling or resetting of any kind. Add 250 if it breaks no parts included in the descent system. Add the weight of the payload in tons, with a max of 250 (if any more, just add 250). Subtract the weight of the landing system in tons, multiplied by 10, with a maximum penalty of 250. Multiply by 2 if on Duna, multiply by 3 if on the Mun, and multiply by 5 if on Tylo. Only the largest multiplier will be used. I will look over your design and provide a number somewhere between 1 and 10 based on how interesting your craft looks to me. Divide the interestingness score by 4, and multiply your score by that. For clarification: (Interest/4)*score. I will do my very best to be as unbiased as possible. Some ideas and tips: This section is just for some good places to start if you want an idea, and additional tips for maximizing score. Plane wings will generally get you low creativity scores, which will severely impact your final score. The descent timer starts at 70km and ends at the instant you land on the ground and do not take off again. Use this to your advantage and maximize your speed before hitting 70km. Nobody said directly vertical trajectories were required, but they are faster. If your timer is longer than 5 minutes, don't bother trying to make it fast (unless you want to beat 5 minutes, that is), because any time over 5 minutes will have the same penalty as 5 minutes. If your landing system is heavier than 25 tons, then don't worry about making it light unless you want it lighter than 25 tons, for similar reasons as listed above. If you have more payload than 250 tons, just shave some off until you just barely make it. At that point you aren't gaining extra points for payload anyways. If you know what you're doing, Tylo has amazing point values. Mountains mean closer landing zones. Use this to shorten your timer. Leaderboards Disqualified Entires (If a design breaks a rule, it is put here. This way these designs are not forgotten, but also not included in the leaderboards.) If you have any questions, complaints, or suggestions about the challenge, please tell me so i can refine this challenge further. On a similar topic, the challenge is subject to rule/scoring changes and early designs may be disqualified or rescored.

Ok ok i didn't mean to spark an argument. I just wanted to share a random thought and stuff. The debate seems to be getting kinda heated (or, comparatively heated as far as KSP forum debates go). I'd really like it if we could just all collectively chill. I guess we'll just see what happens when it releases.

While this is a fun and interesting challenge I think the OP is a bit hard to understand. I believe the point of the challenge is to make a special roving vehicle that isn't actually a traditional rover with motorized wheels, but i don't know for sure as the original post is unclear.

Shower thought I had today: Since KSP1 uses 1.x.x, and since KSP2 is the sequel to KSP1 (and ergo is one of the only real things that would warrant updating the first number), would this mean they would replace the version name scheme with 2.x.x to further remind this is the second iteration of KSP? I don't generally know how this stuff goes, but I thought it'd be clever if 2.x.x

I like this-- I can't wait for it to release! In the meanwhile I'll share my experiences with how planets and moon systems generally work, to aid you in your journey and help add a tad more realism into where you place your planets as you create the list. Greatest apologies if you've heard any of these-- I'm just trying to provide as much helpful information I can. Please correct me if any of these are not correct-- these have been learned with observations of our solar system, as well as certain simulations. The list may get long so I'll package it neatly in a spoiler. sorry if that seemed lengthy, I just wanted to make sure you knew as much as possible about how these things go.

Today I learned it's virtually impossible to uninstall this mod, due to how much stuff it replaces and changes. Unless I missed something so stupidly obvious, I had to delete the entire KSP directory and have Steam reinstall all the files. It boots up properly and I am now in the process of putting my save files and flags back in. also, if I did this just because I missed the stupidly obvious technique, please tell me and the rest of us this stupidly obvious technique so we may safely and easily uninstall in the future.

Almoat all of these sound like a lot of fun to play, but most of them a nightmare to make. While I like these suggestions, I wouldn't say they're likely to occur

I believe it's just a special image file. You can open it and export it with GIMP

Like HullcamVDS?

I'm having trouble with using the SoundtrackEditor. I've loaded it up properly with its core dependencies, as well as Kopernicus and a test planet. I plan to turn the test planet into a full-fledged planet pack with its own soundtrack, but when I load up KSP, SoundtrackEditor is not accessible in any of the toolbars, or in the settings. I used CKAN for the dependencies, and manual installation for this mod and Kopernicus. I can provide KSP.log or ModuleManager.log if needed, depending on which you prefer. Any likely causes or solutions? EDIT: Odd, i think it works now. Sorry to bother you.

pleasedon'tclosein4secondspleasedon'tclosein4seconds

I'm addicted to unfoldy bits and I would be very sad if robotics were not stock, and 5 meter parts (at the very least, with full Making History at the most) should really be stock if huge base setup kits and engines are to be a thing.

@somnambulist Thank you very much! I'll look into these tomorrow and see what I can do.

If I miss a World First record contract, will it return? Example: A contract from the World First people tells me to fly by Eve, but I am time warping to Duna and I miss it. Will the contract come back in the future at random?

Private Division: terminates contract for KSP2, dissolves Star Theory, and delays KSP2 for another year and a half The KSP community:

I've seen a few mods around that can replace the music KSP uses in the circumstances and situations KSP plays it in. For example, replacing a music that plays in space, or a music that plays in the VAB. This is fine and all, but what I think would be more fun is a mod that has several more situations for different music. For example, instead of just "space" and "menu" and "vab", it could have several opportunities for several unique tracks for several situations. Imagine music for Tylo, Bop, Duna, Moho, Minmus, Kerbin, etc. I'm hoping for this mod so I may return to attempting to make music, and perhaps creating fitting music for KSP's planets. The information said here is enough, but I'll ramble further in this spoiler (to conserve space). If you want to see what I'm imagining, or clarification on what I want, then go into it and see.

I don't know if I can. I'm in one of those phases in which I'm not super interested in KSP (it goes back and forth), and in addition I only just recently discovered there's an easier way to use satellite dishes than to spam the unfoldy dish on all spacecraft. I'd do terribly with the communications.

I'm unable to find the link atm due to phone and forum hating eachother, but I made a large thread and poll stating why RSS is a bad idea in every situation for KSP2, including this one. EDIT: found it.

I would love to see "Skratch" in KSP2. A VPL capable of amazingly large things (like Scratch), but tailored to be able to also read and edit values of a ship (depending on if it can be read or edited, like the throttle of an engine or the altimeter). kOS has a close place in my heart but it's a written language, which I'm not the best at memorizing. I wouldn't be upset if it was just Scratch with a few extra KSP-themed blocks, but it would also be cool to see one tailored to fit the theme and color scheme of KSP2's UI and stuff.

What I think should be done is, instead of changing Minmus or removing biomes, doing the same activity over a new biome of the same planet you've done before yields less science than doing a new activity over a new biome of a new planet. First experiment per situation should always yield most science, the rest should yield less. Those done in the same biome in the same situation on the same planet with the same experiment should yield next to nothing, and those done in the same situation in a DIFFERENT biome with the same planet and experiment should yield not full, but not nothing. Example: you perform Random Experiment, which is, for the sake of this example, always biome dependant. It is done in low orbit over the Mun's Highlands. You get max science. You do it again, over the Highlands, and you get less science. So you wait until you're over the Mun's Midlands and do it again for a moderate amount of science. You land in the Mun's Highlands, and get full science for doing the experiment again. You perform it again, and you get next to nothing. You biome hop to the next biome, and you get considerably less but a still moderate amount of science. Do it again in a third biome and you get even less. This should solve the science farming problem in my opinion. Maybe science should be given less for doing the same experiment just in a different biome than what I've shown as an example. I'm not sure about all the details, as it's just a suggestion.

Nope. Plenty of impactors though. TUBM has played Minecraft before. Edit: unedited edit

At long last!

On my first Laythe spaceplane test, I landed it, but it began to slide away. I forgot to put on the brakes. Jebediah ran after it, and I discovered if I did everything in 4x physwarp the plane would not update and it would not slide, until I changed the physwarp. I turned physwarp on and off to get the ladder to work correctly, but that just made the plane slide away more. It eventually caught on something and let me run to it. It continued for a kilometer until he vaporized as he ran.