Scarecrow71

I am not happy with the state of the game. But the biggest disappointment of your life? I mean, do you even own the game yet? I agree that the game isn't what it should be. But if this is the biggest disappointment you have ever faced, your life to this point has been pretty damned charmed.

You completely ignored this part of my post: I am aware of Nate's entire statement, and I even acknowledged that.

Except that you still need to know what to do. Which a lot of people don't. And it's insulting to call them computer illiterate simply because they don't know what to do to get the most out of their machine. It's the same as being told that you are vehicle illiterate simply because you haven't fine tuned your car to get the best gas mileage out of it.

I'd like you to tell me how I'm misrepresenting what Nate said...when he literally said: I literally could not paint the picture any more clear than this. Nate is on record here as saying that it's part of the fun of KSP, and it's part of the Kerbal DNA, to have wobble. As far as listening to the community? We've spoken. The majority of posts that I have seen (and keep in mind what I'm saying there because what I have seen may not necessarily be what the entirety of the community believes) states that wobble is not fun, it should not be in the game, and it should be tweaked so that while it still exists in some form, it should not make the game unplayable simply because we don't have 10,000 struts attached to a single radial engine. Now, before you go off and accuse me of cherry-picking certain things in his response: yes, I am aware of his statement that the team shares the view that this is an issue. Yes, I am aware that he states it's on the top ten. And yes, I'm aware that they continue to say they are looking at things. However, with all of this known, the community itself has a fix/workaround for this: update the physics JSON file and change the value for JOINT_RIGIDTY so that rockets no longer wobble (or so the wobble is far less than it is now). If the community can figure this out, why the frak can't the devs just implement that? Why do we have to continue to update the file through every patch/hotfix/game update? They are looking at fixing it...but the community literally handed them a short-term solution that they won't use? Again, where is my misrepresentation? I've given you the facts, and @PDCWolf has given you the straight-out thread from Steam. How are we misrepresenting things here?

It's still being discussed because Nate's argument is, and has been, and continues to be, that rocket wobble is both fun AND simply a part of the Kerbal experience. In spite of the complaints about it, that's the stance he has taken on this. Please don't ask me to go hunt down his actual quote; it's been stated here in this thread enough times.

@Pawelk198604, you aren't the only one here who has issues docking. I can't do it in KSP1 without MJ (I learned how, but I simply am not patient enough to do it). But it is possible. In fact, take a look at this thread that literally explains how to do it: And this one: And you can use this one, even though it's for KSP1 because the concepts are the same: Also, I'll echo what @The Aziz stated regarding your video. The video is great, but you should have typed out what the actual issue you are having is, using the video as a backup to provide extra clarification and context.

What is especially rage-inducing is that @HarvesteR, and then Squad, were actually quick to deal with bugs, while TT/PD/IG - a far larger entity, by the way - is taking their sweet time as if it's no big deal. Small guy = fast, while large company = snail's pace.

Question for @Dakota: are there going to be more AMA's? If so, can we get one with one of the devs instead of another with the art department?

That is a rather unfair statement. You are making the assumption that if someone is a computer gamer that they must be a hardware specialist and know the ins and outs of how to overclock their PC to get the best performance, and if they don't know they are computer illiterate. I'm a software developer by day and am far from computer illiterate. But I don't know the first thing about fine tuning hardware to get the optimum performance out of it. I took hardware classes in college, but I have neither the desire nor energy to figure it out. Not my wheelhouse. Doesn't make me computer illiterate. Playability isn't just a function of performance. I won't go into detail on the bugs still in force in the game, but two of them make the game unplayable from my perspective. Throw in the wobble issue, and I simply don't wish to fight the game just to do core functions that can be done in KSP1. I shouldn't have to fight the game to play it. I play games to relax, not try to solve for bugs the devs haven't been able to fix months after release AND that QA somehow let slip through.

Copy/paste as a word doc?

Well, you are all off on this page by 1. Why? Because @Watermel00n failed to see the 4920 in this post right before his: Which means I now have to post 2 images here to get us caught up. And we are caught up. Pay attention, people!

That's...what I was suggesting.

My guess is to have another propeller thing on the back of the plane, facing away from the plane, with no propellers, spinning st the same time. This would give counter rotation and potentially balance things (although with no actual propellers on it, it might not as you wouldn't have the torque generating).

Today I pulled off my first Kerbal Orbital Construction. I got a contract in my career game to send Bill up and attach a monopropellant tank to an aging satellite, and having never done orbital construction before I decided "What the heck" and did it. The craft was ugly. Like, U-G-L-Y you ain't got no alibi you ugly. It's a new career save, and I'm only halfway through the tech tree, so it was a hitchhiker container with a probe core attached to it, with a claw and a whole lot of monopropellant. So I sent him up, got the rendezvous, attached the claw to the backside of the satellite, and voila! New tank attached! First time I've done that. I mean, I can rendezvous and dock, and I've rescued plenty of stranded Kerbals in LKO/KHO to this point. But first time for the engineer construction thing. Wish I would have taken some pictures, though. Bummer. The best thing about this is that by fulfilling the contract, I get a free satellite in HKO. The game apparently decided to just hand this thing over to me, so it shows up now in the Tracking Station and I can go fly it and do whatever I want with it. It's in a decent orbit, has antennae and solar panels and such, so I'm going to just leave it there and let it do its thing with helping create a network in space. I think I'm going to just keep doing these contracts to get the free satellites!

Now maybe @Nazalassa?

First, rename your ship to avoid any issues with it. Then go into the tracking station and select the rogue ship. You should be able to terminate from there.

Anybody who is willing to take a pay cut. Numb, dumb...why some and not sumb?

PeasantNorwegianNavalSpoon

Indiana Jones had absolutely no point in being in Raiders of the Lost Ark. I know it's one sentence, but really. He didn't. pedants still would have found the ark. pedants still would have opened it. US government still would have confiscated it. Jones did nothing to further the plot of the movie.